The Differential Effect of Attentional Condition on Subsequent Vocabulary Development

Abstract

This study addressed the potential methodological issues effect of attentional condition on subsequent vocabulary development from a different perspective, which addressed several potential methodological issues of previous research that have been based on psycholinguistic notion of second language learner as a limited capacity processor. The issue of whether learners paying attention to the processing of input for meaning can simultaneously pay attention to process form remains methodologically unclear issue in the area of reactivity. A qualitative study was conducted on six intermediate English as a foreign language learners. Participants were assigned to one of the three types of reading comprehension tasks. Concurrent data of think aloud was employed to establish learners' attention. Results showed that attending learners' attention to processing of lexical forms while reading for meaning has an effect to induce the issue of reactivity effect on subsequent vocabulary development.

Verbal reports in the reading processes of language learners: A methodological review

“…Other cognitivist perspectives—such as the primacy of meaning principle (e.g. Leow et al ., ; Mohammed et al ., ), goal theory, and Ericsson and Simon's (1984) framework for the use of verbal reports (Bowles & Leow, )—were used in other studies (e.g. He, ; Kim & Cha, ).…”

“…Among the L2 models drawn upon were the O'Malley and Chamot's model of language learning strategies (Tabataba'ian & Zabihi, ), Bernhardt's constructivist model of reading (Lee‐Thompson, ; Weil, ), Schmidt's framework of attention and noticing hypothesis (Leow, ; Camps, ; Bowles, ; Godfroid & Schmidtke, ), Primacy of Meaning Principle (Rossomondo, ; Leow et al ., ; Morgan‐Short et al ., ; Mohammed et al ., ), cross‐linguistic transfer theory (Li & Suen, ), Oxford's taxonomy of language learning strategy (Ghavamnia et al ., ), and Cognitive Academic Language Learning approach (Gurses & Adiguzel, ; Kim & Cha, ). When these models were used, researchers relied primarily on concurrent reporting (e.g.…”

“…When these models were used, researchers relied primarily on concurrent reporting (e.g. Leow, ; Bowles, ; Rossomondo, ; Leow et al ., ; Tabataba'ian & Zabihi, ; Morgan‐Short et al ., ; Mohammed et al ., ) and less so on concurrent and concurrent introspective (Lee‐Thompson, ; Weil, ), concurrent and retrospective (Camps, ), and retrospective (Godfroid & Schmidtke, ) protocols.…”

“…Wesche & Paribakht, ; Nassaji, ; Nassaji & Hu, ), Korea (two studies: Ko, ; Kim & Cha, ). Each other country had one study: Austria (Kremmel et al ., ), Belgium (Godfroid & Schmidtke, ), China (Li & Chun, ), Iran (Paribakht, ), Iraq (Mohammed et al ., ), Libya (Bengeleil & Paribakht, ), Malaysia (Ali, ; Radzi & Aziz, ), New Zealand (Tabata‐Sandom, ), Romania (Geladari et al ., ), Taiwan (Yang, ; Chou, ), Thailand (Kasemsap & Lee, ), the Netherlands (Stevenson et al ., ), Turkey (Akyel & Erçetin, ), and Singapore (Zhang et al ., ).…”

A Comparison of Methods for Estimating Relationships in the Change Between Two Time Points for Latent Variables

“…Many researchers working in human development are interested in assessing change over time in one or more psychological constructs, such as mathematics aptitude (Purpura & Logan, 2015), vocabulary development (Mohammed, Majid, & Abdullah, 2016), critical thinking (Ralston & Bays, 2015), and cognition (Budiman, Halim, Mohd Meerah, & Osman, 2014). Perhaps the most effective method for examining such developmental issues involves the use of longitudinal study designs in which a sample of individuals is followed for a period of time, and their performance on one or more constructs of interest is measured multiple times.…”