L2 proficiency positively predicts L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 2 studies · 1 quant-synthesis r2, 1 associational r2 · q2–q3 · i3 large · n=24 studies (29 effect sizes, N=2,771)
Currency · newest study 2023 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i3 L2 proficiency was a significant positive predictor of incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading (β = .37). → Zhao 2016

q3 i? Across controlled second-language studies, incidental learning effects were larger for learners beyond a basic proficiency level (g = 1.40) than for basic learners (g = 0.70) on first posttests, a difference approaching significance (p = .051) that disappeared on follow-up posttests. → Webb et al. 2023

Evidence¶

Zhao 2016¶

Zhao, A., Guo, Y., Biales, C., & Olszewski, A. (2016). Exploring learner factors in second language (L2) incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language, 28(2). http://nflrc.hawaii.edu/rfl. doi:10.64152/10125/66903

q2 · i3 · associational · r2

Multiple linear regression with 129 Chinese-speaking English majors; incidental vocabulary acquisition (unannounced test after reading two passages) as dependent variable. L2 proficiency from TEM-4 raw scores was the strongest predictor, "β = .37, t = 4.39, p < .05".

"Results showed that L2 proficiency (β = .37, t = 4.39, p < .05, see Table 2), anxiety (β = .21, t = 2.54, p < .05), and mastery of strategies (β = .20, t = 2.04, p < .05) were significant positive predictors of L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition."

Webb et al. 2023¶

Webb, S., Uchihara, T., & Yanagisawa, A. (2023). How effective is second language incidental vocabulary learning? A meta-analysis. Language Teaching, 56(2), 161–180. doi:10.1017/s0261444822000507

q3 · meta-analysis · i3 · large effect, g = 1.14 on first posttests · n=24 studies (29 effect sizes, N=2,771) · quant-synthesis · r2

This meta-analysis (open-access full text read) pooled 24 studies of second-language vocabulary learned incidentally from meaning-focused input, 29 effect sizes and 2,771 participants (1,517 in experimental and 1,254 in control groups); studies without a control group were excluded. Against controls, the mean effect was large on first posttests (g = 1.14, 95% CI [0.86, 1.41], k = 28) and on follow-up posttests (g = 0.93, 95% CI [0.44, 1.42], k = 9), and fail-safe N and trim-and-fill showed little concern about publication bias. L2 proficiency was tested as a moderator across modes of input, not only reading: beyond-basic learners had larger effects (g = 1.40, k = 18) than basic learners (g = 0.70, k = 7) on first posttests, a difference the authors describe as approaching significance (p = .051); on follow-up posttests the difference was not significant (p = .869). This fits the direction of the claim at the level of studies, but does not establish proficiency as a significant predictor.

"Mean proportions of target words learned ranged from 9–18% on immediate posttests, and 6–17% on delayed posttests."

Discussion¶

Webb et al. (2023) qualify this claim at the level of studies: across second-language incidental-learning studies, effects were larger for more proficient learners, but the difference only approached significance on first posttests (p = .051) and was absent on follow-up posttests. The claim's one study is a within-sample regression; the meta-analysis compares groups of studies, so the two are not the same test.

Related Claims¶

• Participants incidentally acquired an average of 3.19 of 20 target words after reading two passages — related
• Incidental vocabulary learning anxiety positively predicts L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading — related
• L2 proficiency, anxiety, and mastery of strategies jointly explain 18% of variance in incidental vocabulary acquisition — related
• Higher L2 reading proficiency, motivation, and involvement load are associated with larger incidental vocabulary gains — possibly the same claim (merge candidate)
• Listening proficiency transfers to other language skills, including reading and writing, in second language learners — related
• Reading and listening yield similar proportions of incidental vocabulary learning, with reading ahead only on some immediate posttests — related
• Mastery of incidental vocabulary learning strategies positively predicts L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading — related
• Teacher ratings predicted reading achievement better than common language proficiency tests (41% vs 0-4% additional variance) — related
• Learners' vocabulary size is significantly and positively related to both L2 video comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning — related
• Meaning-focused exposure to spoken L2 input yields large vocabulary gains (g = 1.05) in incidental word learning — related
• Motivation did not significantly predict L2 incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading — related
• The more often learners meet a word while reading, the more likely they are to learn it incidentally; a meta-analysis of correlational studies finds a moderate correlation — related
• Adult (university) participants outperform kindergarten/elementary children in incidental spoken L2 word learning — related
• Vocabulary knowledge gained through extensive reading showed little decay on a three-month delayed posttest, with relative gains ranging from 21.05% (low-level) to 59.01% (high-level) — related
• Lexical adoption shows no significant condition effect after controlling for input volume, but AI-first participants adopted more words at the second dialogue position — related
• Extensive reading has a small, significant positive effect on second and foreign language skills (d = 0.41 across 86 experimental comparisons; d = 0.38 for the 82 immediate-posttest comparisons) — related