Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T23:53:19.379Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

DOES REPEATED PRACTICE MAKE PERFECT? THE EFFECTS OF WITHIN-SESSION REPEATED RETRIEVAL ON SECOND LANGUAGE VOCABULARY LEARNING

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 August 2016

Tatsuya Nakata
Tatsuya Nakata*
Affiliation:
Kansai University, Japan
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Tatsuya Nakata, Faculty of Foreign Language Studies, Kansai University, 3-3-35 Yamate-cho, Suita-shi, Osaka 564-8680 Japan. E-mail: nakata@kansai-u.ac.jp
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Although research shows that repetition increases second language vocabulary learning, only several studies have examined the long-term effects of increasing retrieval frequency in one learning session. With this in mind, the present study examined the effects of within-session repeated retrieval on vocabulary learning. The study is original in that it (a) gave posttests after a delay greater than 2 weeks, (b) employed a paired-associate format to exert strict control over the treatment, (c) considered time-on-task as a factor, and (d) used the same target items for different frequency levels. In this study, 98 Japanese learners studied 16 English-Japanese word pairs using one of the following four retrieval frequency levels: one, three, five, or seven. Results showed that five and seven retrievals contributed to significantly higher scores than one and three retrievals regardless of the posttest timing. When time-on-task was controlled, however, one retrieval led to the largest gain.

Type
Articles
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 39 , Issue 4 , December 2017 , pp. 653 - 679
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

This research was supported by the Faculty Research Grant (#109605) and the Victoria PhD Scholarship from Victoria University of Wellington as well as Grant-in-Aid for Research Activity Start-up (#15H06746) and Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists (A) (#16H05943) from the Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of Japan. This article is based on part of the author’s doctoral dissertation, which was submitted to Victoria University of Wellington in 2013. I am very grateful to Stuart Webb, Paul Nation, Jan Hulstijn, Rod Ellis, Stuart McLean, Laura Huston, and anonymous reviewers for their invaluable advice and Tomohiro Tsuchiya for his cooperation with data collection.

References

REFERENCES

Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. E. (1992). The vocabulary conundrum. American Educator, 16, 14–18; 44–47.Google Scholar
Bahrick, H. P., & Phelps, E. (1987). Retention of Spanish vocabulary over 8 years. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13, 344–349.Google Scholar
Bahrick, H. P., Bahrick, L. E., Bahrick, A. S., & Bahrick, P. E. (1993). Maintenance of foreign language vocabulary and the spacing effect. Psychological Science, 4, 316–321.Google Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52, 323–363.Google Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2007). Effects of opportunities for word retrieval during second language vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 57, 35–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2012). Input-based incremental vocabulary instruction. Alexandria, VA: TESOL.Google Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2013). Four input-retrieval patterns and incidentally oriented vocabulary learning during reading. Paper presented at the Vocab@Vic Conference, Wellington, New Zealand.Google Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2015). Lexical input processing and vocabulary learning. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Bird, S. (2010). Effects of distributed practice on the acquisition of second language English syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics, 31, 635–650.Google Scholar
Bisson, M.-J., van Heuven, W. J. B., Conklin, K., & Tunney, R. J. (2014). The role of repeated exposure to multimodal input in incidental acquisition of foreign language vocabulary. Language Learning, 64, 855–877.Google Scholar
Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In Metcalfe, J. & Shimamura, A. (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185–205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Bloom, K. C., & Shuell, T. J. (1981). Effects of massed and distributed practice on the learning and retention of second-language vocabulary. The Journal of Educational Research, 74, 245–248.Google Scholar
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 354–380.Google Scholar
Cepeda, N. J., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., Mozer, M. C., & Pashler, H. (2009). Optimizing distributed practice: Theoretical analysis and practical implications. Experimental Psychology, 56, 236–246.Google Scholar
Chen, C., & Truscott, J. (2010). The effects of repetition and L1 lexicalization on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics, 31, 693–713.Google Scholar
Elgort, I. (2011). Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 61, 367–413.Google Scholar
Elgort, I., & Warren, P. (2014). L2 vocabulary learning from reading: Explicit and tacit lexical knowledge and the role of learner and item variables. Language Learning, 64, 365–414.Google Scholar
Ellis, R. (1995). Modified oral input and the acquisition of word meanings. Applied Linguistics, 16, 409–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fitzpatrick, T., Al-Qarni, I., & Meara, P. (2008). Intensive vocabulary learning: A case study. Language Learning Journal, 36, 239–248.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folse, K. S. (2004). Vocabulary myths: Applying second language research to classroom teaching. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 273–293.Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51, 539–558.Google Scholar
Judd, E. L. (1978). Vocabulary teaching and TESOL: A need for re-evaluation of existing assumptions. TESOL Quarterly, 12, 71–76.Google Scholar
Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2008). The critical importance of retrieval for learning. Science, 319, 966–968.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kornell, N. (2009). Optimising learning using flashcards: Spacing is more effective than cramming. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23, 1297–1317.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Larson, D. N., & Smelley, W. A. (1972). Becoming bilingual: A guide to language learning. Pasadena, CA: William Carey Library.Google Scholar
Laufer, B. (2005). Focus on Form in second language vocabulary learning. EUROSLA Yearbook, 5, 223–250.Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 54, 399–436.Google Scholar
Laufer, B., & Rozovski-Roitblat, B. (2011). Incidental vocabulary acquisition: The effects of task type, word occurrence and their combination. Language Teaching Research, 15, 391–411.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laufer, B., & Shmueli, K. (1997). Memorizing new words: Does teaching have anything to do with it? RELC Journal, 28, 89–108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lewis, M. (1993). The Lexical Approach. Hove, UK: Language Teaching Publications.Google Scholar
Logan, J. M., & Balota, D. A. (2008). Expanded vs. equal interval spaced retrieval practice: Exploring different schedules of spacing and retention interval in younger and older adults. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 15, 257–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mondria, J. A. (2003). The effects of inferring, verifying, and memorizing on the retention of L2 word meanings: An experimental comparison of the “Meaning-Inferred Method” and the “Meaning-Given Method.” Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 473–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mondria, J. A., & Wiersma, B. (2004). Receptive, productive and receptive + productive L2 vocabulary learning: What difference does it make? In Bogaards, P. & Laufer, B. (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition, and testing (pp. 79–100). Amsterdam, The Netherlands: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Nakata, T. (2011). Computer-assisted second language vocabulary learning in a paired-associate paradigm: A critical investigation of flashcard software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24, 17–38.Google Scholar
Nakata, T. (2015a). Effects of expanding and equal spacing on second language vocabulary learning: Does gradually increasing spacing increase vocabulary learning? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 677–711.Google Scholar
Nakata, T. (2015b). Effects of feedback timing on second language vocabulary learning: Does delaying feedback increase learning? Language Teaching Research, 19, 416–434.Google Scholar
Nakata, T., & Webb, S. (in press). Does studying vocabulary in smaller sets increase learning? The effects of part and whole learning on second language vocabulary acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition. doi:10.1017/S0272263115000236.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63, 59–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2011). Research into practice: Vocabulary. Language Teaching, 44, 529–539.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2013). Learning vocabulary in another language (2nd ed.). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P., & Webb, S. (2011). Researching and analyzing vocabulary. Boston, MA: Heinle Cengage Learning.Google Scholar
Oxford, R., & Crookall, D. (1990). Vocabulary learning: A critical analysis of techniques. TESL Canada Journal, 7, 9–30.Google Scholar
Paribakht, T. S., & Wesche, M. B. (1997). Vocabulary enhancement activities and reading for meaning in second language vocabulary acquisition. In Coady, J. & Huckin, T. (Eds.), Second language vocabulary acquisition: A rationale for pedagogy (pp. 174–200). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Peters, E. (2012). The differential effects of two vocabulary instruction methods on EFL word learning: A study into task effectiveness. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 50, 213–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Peters, E. (2014). The effects of repetition and time of post-test administration on EFL learners’ form recall of single words and collocations. Language Teaching Research, 18, 75–94.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2009). Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory? Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 437–447.Google Scholar
Roediger, H. L., & Arnold, K. M. (2012). The one-trial learning controversy and its aftermath: Remembering Rock (1957). The American Journal of Psychology, 125, 127–143.Google Scholar
Rogers, J., Webb, S., & Nakata, T. (2015). Do the cognacy characteristics of loanwords make them more easily learned than noncognates? Language Teaching Research, 19, 9–27.Google Scholar
Rohrer, D., Taylor, K. M., Pashler, H., Wixted, J. T., & Cepeda, N. J. (2005). The effect of overlearning on long-term retention. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 19, 361–374.Google Scholar
Royer, J. M. (1973). Memory effects for test-like-events during acquisition of foreign language vocabulary. Psychological Reports, 32, 195–198.Google Scholar
Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199–227). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Steinel, M. P., Hulstijn, J. H., & Steinel, W. (2007). Second language idiom learning in a paired-associate paradigm: Effects of direction of learning, direction of testing, idiom imageability, and idiom transparency. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 29, 449–484.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L. (1908). Memory for paired associates. Psychological Review, 15, 122–138.Google Scholar
van Zeeland, H., & Schmitt, N. (2013). Incidental vocabulary acquisition through L2 listening: A dimensions approach. System, 41, 609–624.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33–52.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2007a). The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 28, 46–65.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2007b). Learning word pairs and glossed sentences: The effects of a single context on vocabulary knowledge. Language Teaching Research, 11, 63–81.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2008). The effects of context on incidental vocabulary learning. Reading in a Foreign Language, 20, 232–245.Google Scholar
Webb, S. (2009). The effects of receptive and productive learning of word pairs on vocabulary knowledge. RELC Journal, 40, 360–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wissman, K. T., Rawson, K. A., & Pyc, M. A. (2012). How and when do students use flashcards? Memory, 20, 568–579.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Nakata supplementary material

Appendix

Download Nakata supplementary material(File)
File 60.7 KB