Cited by 223Second Language Acquisition and LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningReading and Literacy Development

Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: the involvement load hypothesis on trial

Keating, Gregory D.·2008·Language Teaching Research

Abstract

This study tests the claim that word learning and retention in a second language are contingent upon a task's involvement load (i.e. the amount of need, search, and evaluation it imposes), as proposed by Laufer and Hulstijn (2001). Seventy-nine beginning learners of Spanish completed one of three vocabulary learning tasks that varied in the amount of involvement (i.e. mental effort) they induced: reading comprehension (no effort), reading comprehension plus target word suppliance (moderate effort), and sentence writing (strong effort). Passive and active knowledge of the target words was assessed immediately after treatment and two weeks later. In line with the predictions of the Involvement Load Hypothesis, retention was highest in the sentence writing task, lower in the reading plus fill-in task, and lowest in the reading comprehension task. However, when time on task was considered, the benefit associated with more involving tasks faded. The results are discussed in light of form-focused vocabulary instruction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/1362168808089922

Cites

45 of 46 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 4

  1. Barcroft, J., 2000, The effects of sentence writing as semantic elaboration on the allocation of processing resources and second language acquisition
  2. Cho, K.S., 1994, Journal of Reading, 37, 662
  3. de la Fuente, M.J., 2002, Acquisition, 24, 81
  4. Hu, M., 2000, Reading in a Foreign Language, 13, 403

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Keating, G. D.
Affiliations
San Diego State University (US)
Corresponding author
Keating, Gregory D.
Venue
Language Teaching Research
Published
2008-07
Volume
12
Issue
3
Pages
365-386
ISSN
  • 1362-1688 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-0954
OpenAlex
W2012822164
Cited by
223
References
46
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 8 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 12 · 2021: 19 · 2020: 20 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 16 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 9 · 2015: 22 · 2014: 11 · 2013: 17 · 2012: 14
FWCI
9.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Language Teaching Research (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Illinois at Chicago
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
involvement load hypothesis, second language vocabulary acquisition, vocabulary retention, task effort, Spanish as a second language, sentence writing, reading comprehension, form-focused instruction, beginning learners, time on task

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