No significant overall linear trend of exposure number on the incidental learning effect, though two exposures yield a significantly smaller effect than eight in block 1¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2014 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Linear contrasts showed no significant effect of exposure number in block 1 or block 2, but a one-tailed comparison of two versus eight exposures was significant in the participant analysis in block 1 (d = 0.21). → Marie-Josée Bisson 2014

Evidence¶

Marie-Josée Bisson 2014¶

Marie-Josée Bisson, Walter J. B. van Heuven, Kathy Conklin, and Richard J. Tunney. (2014). The Role of Repeated Exposure to Multimodal Input in Incidental Acquisition of Foreign Language Vocabulary. Language Learning 64:4. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12085

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Repeated-measures ANOVA linear contrasts on difference scores (old minus new) in the participant and item analyses found no significant linear trend across two, four, six, and eight exposures in either block; the article reports only test statistics, no standardized effect for the overall trend.

"Results revealed no significant linear contrasts either for block 1, F1(1, 65) = 2.31, p = .13, ηp2 = .03, F2(3, 76) = 1.64, p = .20, ηp2 = .02, or block 2, Fs < 1."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• The incidental learning advantage occurs from as little as two exposures to multimodal stimuli in complete beginners — related
• Incidental multimodal exposure produces better explicit translation-recognition performance on previously exposed words than on new words in beginner FL learners — related
• Per-exposure learning gains decrease as the number of exposures increases: a small but significant negative linear trend in the normalized incidental learning effect — 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 — reports the opposite
• Participants respond increasingly faster to stimuli presented more often during the incidental letter-search task — related