Cited by 212Second Language Acquisition and LearningEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSubtitles and Audiovisual Media

Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on FormS in Second-Language Vocabulary Learning

Laufer, Batia·2006·The Canadian Modern Language Review

Abstract

The study compares the effectiveness of Focus on Form (FonF) and Focus on FormS (FonFs) approaches in learning new L2 words by 158 high-school learners of English as L2. In phase 1 of the study, the FonF group read a text containing the target words, discussed it in small groups, and answered comprehension questions. The FonFs group studied the target words as discrete items with their meanings and examples of usage. In phase 2 of the study, all learners received the target words with their meanings and studied them for 15 minutes for a quiz. They were tested immediately after each phase, and two weeks later. Results revealed significantly higher scores for FonFs group after phase 1, but the difference disappeared after phase 2. As learners cannot be expected to study all vocabulary for tests, form-focused instruction - and particularly FonFs - is claimed to be indispensable for L2 vocabulary learning.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3138/cmlr.63.1.149

Cites

64 of 64 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?

  • Most studies comparing TBLT and TSLT have been short term and/or methodologically flawed.

    “Unfortunately, most of the studies that have sought to compare TBLT and TSLT (e.g.De la Fuente, 2006;Laufer, 2006;Sheen, 2006) have been short term and/ or methodologically flawed.”

    From Position paper: Moving task-based language teaching forward (2017) · cites this paper as Laufer, 2006

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Laufer, B.
Corresponding author
Laufer, Batia
Venue
The Canadian Modern Language Review
Published
2006-09
Volume
63
Issue
1
Pages
149-166
ISSN
  • 0008-4506 (ISSN-L)
  • 1710-1131
OpenAlex
W2009388101
Cited by
212
References
64
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 5 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 10 · 2021: 49 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 14 · 2017: 9 · 2016: 11 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 14 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 13
FWCI
7.92
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Canadian Modern Language Review/ La Revue canadienne des langues vivantes (publishedVersion)
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 › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Subtitles and Audiovisual Media
Keywords
form-focused instruction, second language vocabulary acquisition, English as a second language, vocabulary acquisition, high school students

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