Cited by 126Second Language Acquisition and LearningPsychometric Methodologies and TestingEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Scoring Yes–No vocabulary tests: Reaction time vs. nonword approaches

Pellicer-Sánchez, Ana, Schmitt, Norbert·2012·Language Testing

Abstract

Despite a number of research studies investigating the Yes–No vocabulary test format, one main question remains unanswered: What is the best scoring procedure to adjust for testee overestimation of vocabulary knowledge? Different scoring methodologies have been proposed based on the inclusion and selection of nonwords in the test. However, there is currently no consensus on the best adjustment procedure using these nonwords. Two studies were conducted to examine a new methodology for scoring Yes–No tests based on testees’ response times (RTs) to the words in the test, on the assumption that faster responses would be more certain and accurate whereas more hesitant and inaccurate ones would be reflected in slower RTs. Participants performed a timed Yes–No test and were then interviewed to ascertain their actual vocabulary knowledge. Study 1 explored the viability of this approach and Study 2 examined whether the RT approach presented any advantage over the more traditional nonword approaches. Results showed that there was no clear advantage for any of the approaches under comparison, but their effectiveness depended on factors like the false alarm rate and the size of participants’ overestimation of their lexical knowledge.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0265532212438053

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • No advantage was found for using reaction time or nonwords in scoring yes/no vocabulary tests.

    “No advantage was found for any of these approaches and they referred to other factors that could affect the effectiveness of the scoring.”

    From The Vocabulary Knowledge of Saudi EFL Tertiary Students (2019) · cites this paper as Pellicer-Sánchez & Schmitt, 2012

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. Anderson R. C., 1983, Advances in reading/language research: A research annual, 231
  2. Ayto J., 2006, The Hutchinson dictionary of difficult words
  3. 10.1177/026553220101800301 · DOI
  4. 10.1191/1362168802lr103oa · DOI
  5. 10.1017/CBO9780511667268.006 · DOI
  6. Green D., 1966, Signal detection theory and psychophysics
  7. 10.1016/j.system.2009.09.006 · DOI
  8. 10.1191/0265532202lt229oa · DOI
  9. 10.1111/j.0023-8333.2004.00260.x · DOI
  10. 10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.12 · DOI
  11. Lemhöfer K., 2009, Paper presented at AmLab conference
  12. Meara P., 1990, Foreign language comprehension and production, 103
  13. Meara P., 1992, EFL vocabulary tests
  14. Meara P., 1994, Curriculum research: Different disciplines and common goals, 15
  15. Meara P., 2010, EFL vocabulary tests
  16. 10.1177/026553228700400202 · DOI
  17. Meara P., 1988, Applied linguistics in society, 80
  18. 10.3138/cmlr.50.2.296 · DOI
  19. Nation I. S. P., 1990, Teaching and learning vocabulary
  20. 10.1057/9780230293977 · DOI · Paper page
  21. 10.1016/0160-2896(77)90025-3 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Pellicer-Sánchez, A., & Schmitt, N.
Affiliations
  • University of Nottingham, UK
  • University of Nottingham (GB)
Venue
Language Testing
Published
2012-07-15
Volume
29
Issue
4
Pages
489-509
ISSN
  • 0265-5322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0946
OpenAlex
W2119520460
Cited by
126
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 30 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 24 · 2019: 7 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 5 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 9
FWCI
9.02
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Language Testing (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
reaction time (psychology), false alarm rate, reaction time

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review