CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1,338Second Language Acquisition and LearningReading and Literacy DevelopmentEFL/ESL Teaching and Learning

Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English

Open access
Lemhöfer, Kristin, Broersma, Mirjam·2012·Behavior Research Methods
DOI 10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0PMC PMC3356522
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

The increasing number of experimental studies on second language (L2) processing, frequently with English as the L2, calls for a practical and valid measure of English vocabulary knowledge and proficiency. In a large-scale study with Dutch and Korean speakers of L2 English, we tested whether LexTALE, a 5-min vocabulary test, is a valid predictor of English vocabulary knowledge and, possibly, even of general English proficiency. Furthermore, the validity of LexTALE was compared with that of self-ratings of proficiency, a measure frequently used by L2 researchers. The results showed the following in both speaker groups: (1) LexTALE was a good predictor of English vocabulary knowledge; 2) it also correlated substantially with a measure of general English proficiency; and 3) LexTALE was generally superior to self-ratings in its predictions. LexTALE, but not self-ratings, also correlated highly with previous experimental data on two word recognition paradigms. The test can be carried out on or downloaded from www.lextale.com .

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • LexTALE is a widely used, validated vocabulary test in SLA research, having demonstrated substantial correlations with overall proficiency in English.

    “LexTALE is a widely used, validated vocabulary test in SLA research, having demonstrated substantial correlations with overall proficiency in English (see Lemhöfer & Broersma, 2012).”

    From The impact of L1 speaking style, task mode, and L2 proficiency on L2 fluency: A within-subject study of monologic and dialogic speech (2025) · cites this paper as Lemhöfer & Broersma, 2012

    The Abstract reports that LexTALE predicted English vocabulary knowledge and correlated substantially with a measure of general English proficiency in Dutch and Korean L2 speakers. The Discussion’s summary calls it a valid assessment tool, but another Discussion passage says the authors hoped LexTALE *would become* widely used; this paper does not establish that it was already widely used in SLA research. (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • The Oxford Quick Placement Test aligns with the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and is widely used in research.

    “As part of the university admission requirements, they completed the Oxford Quick Placement Test, which aligns with the Common European Framework of Reference (CEFR) and is widely used in research (Lemhöfer and Broersma, 2012;Wang and Trefers-Daller, 2017).”

    From Transformative impacts of explicit morphological instruction on irregular inflectional acquisition in Saudi EFL learners (2024) · cites this paper as Lemhöfer and Broersma, 2012

    The Method section (Part 4: Quick Placement Test) says the QPT groups learners into levels linked to the Common European Framework, supporting the CEFR alignment. The Introduction says it is only “occasionally used” in L2 studies and is too long and costly to serve as a standard tool in psycholinguistic studies, so it does not support “widely used in research.” (LLM, conf=0.89)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • Participants' proficiency level was estimated at C1/C2 on average based on LexTALE scores.

    “Their proficiency level was estimated at C1/C2 level in the CEFR on average, based on the LexTALE receptive vocabulary test scores (M = 86.4%,SD = 8.06; scores over 80% indicate level C1/C2, Lemhöfer & Broersma, 2012).”

    From The impact of L1 speaking style, task mode, and L2 proficiency on L2 fluency: A within-subject study of monologic and dialogic speech (2025) · cites this paper as Lemhöfer & Broersma, 2012

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 48

  1. Abutalebi J Neural aspects of second language representation and language control Acta Psychologica 2008 128 466 478 10.1016/j.actpsy.2008.03.014 18479667 · DOI
  2. Balota DA Cortese MJ Sergent-Marshall SD Spieler DH Yap MJ Visual word recognition of single-syllable words Journal of Experimental Psychology. General 2004 133 283 316 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283 15149254 · DOI
  3. Blumenfeld H Marian V Constraints on parallel activation in bilingual spoken language processing: Examining proficiency and lexical status using eye-tracking Language and Cognitive Processes 2007 22 633 660 10.1080/01690960601000746 · DOI
  4. Broersma M Perception of final fricative voicing: Native and nonnative listeners’ use of vowel duration Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 2010 127 1636 1644 10.1121/1.3292996 20329862 · DOI
  5. Brysbaert M van Dyck G van de Poel M Visual word recognition in bilinguals: Evidence from masked phonological priming Journal of Experimental Psychology. Human Perception and Performance 1999 25 137 148 10.1037/0096-1523.25.1.137 10069030 · DOI
  6. Cameron L Measuring vocabulary size in English as an additional language Language Teaching Research 2002 6 145 173 10.1191/1362168802lr103oa · DOI
  7. Canseco-Gonzalez E Brehm L Brick CA Brown-Schmidt S Fischer K Wagner K Carpet or carcel: The effect of age of acquisition and language mode on bilingual lexical access Language and Cognitive Processes 2010 25 669 705 10.1080/01690960903474912 · DOI
  8. Chambers CG Cooke H Lexical competition during second-language listening: Sentence context, but not proficiency, constrains interference from the native lexicon Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2009 35 1029 1040 10.1037/a0015901 19586268 · DOI
  9. de Groot AMB Borgwaldt S Bos M van den Eijnden E Lexical decision and word naming in bilinguals: Language effects and task effects Journal of Memory and Language 2002 47 91 124 10.1006/jmla.2001.2840 · DOI
  10. Delgado P Guerrero G Goggin JP Ellis BB Self-assessment of linguistic skills by bilingual hispanics Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 1999 21 31 46 10.1177/0739986399211003 · DOI
  11. Diependaele, K., Lemhöfer, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2011). Explaining individual differences in the word frequency effect: Insights from first and second language word recognition. Manuscript submitted for publication. 23025801
  12. Dijkstra T Miwa K Brummelhuis B Sappelli M Baayen H How cross-language similarity and task demands affect cognate recognition Journal of Memory and Language 2010 62 284 301 10.1016/j.jml.2009.12.003 · DOI
  13. Elston-Güttler KE Gunter TC Fine-tuned: Phonology and semantics affect first- to second-language zooming in Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2009 21 180 196 10.1162/jocn.2009.21015 18489240 · DOI
  14. Fitzpatrick T Clenton J The challenge of validation: Assessing the performance of a test of productive vocabulary Language Testing 2010 27 537 554 10.1177/0265532209354771 · DOI
  15. FitzPatrick I Indefrey P Lexical competition in nonnative speech comprehension Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010 22 1165 1178 10.1162/jocn.2009.21301 19583470 · DOI
  16. Fontes ABADL Schwartz AI On a different plane: Cross-language effects on the conceptual representations of within-language homonyms Language and Cognitive Processes 2010 25 508 532 10.1080/01690960903285797 · DOI
  17. Haigh CA Jared D The activation of phonological representations by bilinguals while reading silently: Evidence from interlingual homophones Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2007 33 623 644 10.1037/0278-7393.33.4.623 17576144 · DOI
  18. Hakuta K Bialystok E Wiley E Critical evidence: A test of the critical-period hypothesis for second-language acquisition Psychological Science 2003 14 31 38 10.1111/1467-9280.01415 12564751 · DOI
  19. Hawkins R Al-Eid S Almahboob I Athanasopoulos P Chaengchenkit R Hu J Velasco-Zárato K Accounting for English article interpretation by L2 speakers EUROSLA Yearbook 2006 6 7 25 10.1075/eurosla.6.04haw · DOI
  20. Huibregtse I Admiraal W Meara P Scores on a yes–no vocabulary test: Correction for guessing and response style Language Testing 2002 19 227 245 10.1191/0265532202lt229oa · DOI
  21. Jared D Kroll JF Do bilinguals activate phonological representations in one or both of their languages when naming words? Journal of Memory and Language 2001 44 2 31 10.1006/jmla.2000.2747 · DOI
  22. Kotz SA A critical review of ERP and fMRI evidence on L2 syntactic processing Brain and Language 2009 109 68 74 10.1016/j.bandl.2008.06.002 18657314 · DOI
  23. Lemhöfer K Dijkstra T Recognizing cognates and interlexical homographs: Effects of code similarity in language specific and generalized lexical decision Memory and Cognition 2004 32 533 550 10.3758/BF03195845 15478748 · DOI
  24. Lemhöfer K Dijkstra T Michel MC Three languages, one ECHO: Cognate effects in trilingual word recognition Language and Cognitive Processes 2004 19 585 611 10.1080/01690960444000007 · DOI
  25. Lemhöfer K Dijkstra T Schriefers H Baayen RH Grainger J Zwitserlood P Native language influences on word recognition in a second language: A mega-study Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2008 34 12 31 10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.12 18194052 · DOI
  26. Lemmon CR Goggin JP The measurement of bilingualism and its relationship to cognitive ability Applied PsychoLinguistics 1989 10 133 155 10.1017/S0142716400008493 · DOI
  27. Leonard MK Brown TT Travis KE Gharapetian L Hagler DJ Jr Dale AM Halgren E Spatiotemporal dynamics of bilingual word processing NeuroImage 2010 49 3286 3294 10.1016/j.neuroimage.2009.12.009 20004256 PMC2824560 · DOI
  28. Libben MR Titone DA Bilingual lexical access in context: Evidence from eye movements during reading Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition 2009 35 381 390 10.1037/a0014875 19271853 · DOI
  29. Liu H Hu Z Guo T Peng D Speaking words in two languages with one brain: Neural overlap and dissociation Brain Research 2009 1316 75 82 10.1016/j.brainres.2009.12.030 20026317 · DOI
  30. Macizo P Bajo T Cruz Martín M Inhibitory processes in bilingual language comprehension: Evidence from Spanish–English interlexical homographs Journal of Memory and Language 2010 63 232 244 10.1016/j.jml.2010.04.002 · DOI
  31. Marian V Blumenfeld HK Kaushanskaya M The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 2007 50 940 967 10.1044/1092-4388(2007/067) 17675598 · DOI
  32. Meara PM Buxton B An alternative to multiple choice vocabulary tests Language Testing 1987 4 142 154 10.1177/026553228700400202 · DOI
  33. Midgley KJ Holcomb PJ Grainger J Masked repetition and translation priming in second language learners: A window on the time-course of form and meaning activation using ERPs Psychophysiology 2009 46 551 565 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2009.00784.x 19298629 PMC2692905 · DOI
  34. Mochida K Harrington M The yes/no test as a measure of receptive vocabulary knowledge Language Testing 2006 2 73 98 10.1191/0265532206lt321oa · DOI · Paper page
  35. Ota M Hartsuiker RJ Haywood SL The KEY to the ROCK: Near-homophony in nonnative visual word recognition Cognition 2009 111 263 269 10.1016/j.cognition.2008.12.007 19230869 · DOI
  36. Palmer SD van Hooff JC Havelka J Language representation and processing in fluent bilinguals: Electrophysiological evidence for asymmetric mapping in bilingual memory Neuropsychologia 2010 48 1426 1437 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2010.01.010 20138064 · DOI
  37. Prior A MacWhinney B Kroll JF Translation norms for English and Spanish: The role of lexical variables, word class, and L2 proficiency in negotiating translation ambiguity Behavior Research Methods 2007 39 1029 1038 10.3758/BF03193001 18183923 PMC4109968 · DOI
  38. Qian DD Investigating the relationship between vocabulary knowledge and academic reading performance: An assessment perspective Language Learning 2002 52 513 536 10.1111/1467-9922.00193 · DOI
  39. Quick Placement Test. (2001). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  40. Rossi S Gugler MF Friederici AD Hahne A The impact of proficiency on syntactic second-language processing of German and Italian: Evidence from event-related potentials Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2006 18 2030 2048 10.1162/jocn.2006.18.12.2030 17129189 · DOI
  41. Stæhr LS Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language Studies in Second Language Acquisition 2009 31 577 607 10.1017/S0272263109990039 · DOI
  42. Talamas A Kroll JF Dufour R From form to meaning: Stages in the acquisition of second-language vocabulary Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 1999 2 45 58 10.1017/S1366728999000140 · DOI
  43. Tokowicz N Kroll JF de Groot AMB van Hell JG Number of translation norms for Dutch–English translation pairs: A new tool for examining language production Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers 2002 34 435 451 10.3758/BF03195472 12395560 · DOI
  44. van der Meij M Cuetos F Carreiras M Barber HA Electrophysiological correlates of language switching in second language learners Psychophysiology 2011 48 44 54 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2010.01039.x 21143487 · DOI
  45. Verhoef KMW Roelofs A Chwilla DJ Electrophysiological evidence for endogenous control of attention in switching between languages in overt picture naming Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 2010 22 1832 1843 10.1162/jocn.2009.21291 19580393 · DOI
  46. White L Melhorn JF Mattys SL Segmentation by lexical subtraction in Hungarian speakers of second-language English Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2010 63 544 554 10.1080/17470210903006971 19591079 · DOI
  47. Winskel H Radach R Luksaneeyanawin S Eye movements when reading spaced and unspaced Thai and English: A comparison of Thai–English bilinguals and English monolinguals Journal of Memory and Language 2009 61 339 351 10.1016/j.jml.2009.07.002 · DOI
  48. Zhou H Chen B Yang M Dunlap S Language nonselective access to phonological representations: Evidence from Chinese–English bilinguals Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology 2010 63 2051 2066 10.1080/17470211003718705 20486019 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M.
Affiliations
  • Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
  • Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics (NL)
Corresponding author
Lemhöfer, Kristin
ORCID
Venue
Behavior Research Methods
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2011-09-05
Volume
44
Issue
2
Pages
325-343
ISSN
  • 1554-351X (ISSN-L)
  • 1554-3528
DOI
10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0
PMC
PMC3356522
OpenAlex
W2117031222
Cited by
1,338
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 160 · 2025: 184 · 2024: 146 · 2023: 142 · 2022: 170 · 2021: 126 · 2020: 103 · 2019: 82 · 2018: 83 · 2017: 51 · 2016: 30 · 2015: 29 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
19.71
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by-nc
Locations
  • Behavior Research Methods (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by-nc)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
Keywords
vocabulary knowledge, English as a second language, advanced learners, test validity, word recognition, Dutch speakers, Korean speakers, second language processing
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, England, Female, Humans, Korea, Language Tests, Language Therapy, Male, Netherlands, Predictive Value of Tests, Psycholinguistics, Psychomotor Performance, Translations, Vocabulary, Reproducibility of Results, Multilingualism, Internet, Young Adult

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