Which Type of Vocabulary-Knowledge Better Correlates with Reading-Comprehension,Meaning-Recognition or Meaning-Recall?

Abstract

This study investigated the relationships between two types of vocabulary tests and second language reading-comprehension (RC) in a classroom assessment setting. A group of 40 learners completed a written-receptive meaning-recall measure of the Updated Vocabulary Levels Test (UVLT) and the written-receptive meaning-recognition UVLT. Correlation analysis was conducted to examine the relationships between scores from the two tests and The TEST of English for International Communication Reading scores. The results showed that the relationship between the meaning-recall and RC (r =0 .85, p <0 .001) was higher than between the meaning-recognition and RC (r =0 .78, p <0 .001) with a significant difference (Steiger's z = 3.06, p =0 .002). This suggests that meaning-recall knowledge is a better predictor of RC.

Keywords

Vocabulary reading meaning-recall meaning-recognition correlation analysis

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Beglar

(2010) A Rasch-based validation of the Vocabulary Size Test. Language Testing 27(1): 101–118.

Beglar

Hunt

(1999) Revising and validating the 2000 word level and university word level vocabulary tests. Language Testing 16(2): 131–162.

Browne

Culligan

Phillips

(2013) The new general service list. http://www.newgeneralservicelist.org .

Coxhead

(2000) A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly 34(2): 213–238.

Educational Testing Service (2022a) 2022 report on test takers worldwide. https://www.ets.org/content/dam/ets-org/pdfs/toeic/toeic-listening-reading-report-test-takers-worldwide.pdf .

Educational Testing Service (2022b) Score user guide — TOEIC ® Listening & Reading test, paper delivered. https://www.ets.org/content/dam/ets-org/pdfs/toeic/toeic-listening-reading-score-user-guide.pdf.

Grabe

(2009) Reading in a Second Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Jeon

Yamashita

(2014) L2 Reading comprehension and its correlates: a meta-analysis. Language Learning 64(1): 160–212.

Jeon

Yamashita

(2022) L2 Reading comprehension and its correlates: an updated meta-analysis. In: Jeon

E-H

In'nami

(eds) Understanding L2 Proficiency: Theoretical and Meta-analytic Investigations. Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 29–86.

10.

Kim

(2013) Statistical notes for clinical researchers: assessing normal distribution using skewness and kurtosis. Restorative Dentistry & Endodontics 38(1): 52–54.

11.

Kremmel

Schmitt

(2016) Interpreting vocabulary test scores: what do various item formats tell us about learners’ ability to employ words? Language Assessment Quarterly 13(4): 377–392.

12.

Laufer

Aviad-Levitzky

(2017) What type of vocabulary knowledge predicts Reading comprehension: word meaning recall or word meaning recognition? The Modern Language Journal 101(4): 729–741.

13.

Laufer

Goldstein

(2004) Testing vocabulary knowledge: size, strength, and computer science adaptiveness. Language Learning 54(3): 399–436.

14.

Lucovich

(2014) Test taking and DK use on the vocabulary size test. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction 3(2): 69–77.

15.

McDonald

Asaba

(2015) ‘I don’t know’ use and guessing on the bilingual Japanese vocabulary size test: a preliminary report. Vocabulary Learning and Instruction 4(1): 16–25.

16.

McLean

Stewart

Batty

(2020) Predicting L2 Reading proficiency with modalities of vocabulary knowledge: a bootstrapping approach. Language Testing 37(3): 389–411.

17.

Nation

ISP

Beglar

(2007) A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher 31(7): 9–13.

18.

Nation

ISP

Webb

(2011) Researching and Analyzing Vocabulary. Boston: Heinle Cengage Learning.

19.

Nation ISP (1983) Teaching and testing vocabulary. Guidelines 5(1): 12–25.

20.

Nation ISP (2001) Learning Vocabulary in Another Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

21.

Nation ISP (2006) How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review 63(1): 59–82.

22.

Nation ISP (2012) The BNC/COCA word family lists (17 September 2012). Unpublished paper. Available at: https://www.wgtn.ac.nz/lals/resources/paul-nations-resources/paul-nations-publications/publications/documents/Information-on-the-BNC_COCA-word-family-lists.pdf (accessed 30 October 2022).

23.

Read

(2000) Assessing Vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

24.

Schmitt

Jiang

Grabe

(2011) The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal 95(1): 26–43.

25.

Schmitt

Clapham

(2001) Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test. Language Testing 18(1): 55–88.

26.

Stewart

(2014) Do multiple-choice options inflate estimates of vocabulary size on the VST? Language Assessment Quarterly 11(3): 271–282.

27.

Stewart

Gyllstad

Nicklin

, et al. (2024) Establishing meaning recall and meaning recognition vocabulary knowledge as distinct psychometric constructs in relation to reading proficiency. Language Testing 41(1): 89–108.

28.

Stewart

White

(2011) Estimating guessing effects on the Vocabulary Levels Test for differing degrees of word knowledge. TESOL Quarterly 45(2): 370–380.

29.

Stoeckel

Bennett

McLean

(2016) Is “I don't know” a viable answer choice on the Vocabulary Size Test? TESOL Quarterly 50(4): 965−975.

30.

Webb

(2021) A different perspective on the limitations of size and levels tests of written receptive vocabulary knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 43(2): 454–461.

31.

Webb

Sasao

Balance

(2017) The updated vocabulary levels test: developing and validating two new forms of the VLT. ITL – International Journal of Applied Linguistics 168(1): 34–70.

32.

Zhang

(2020) The relationship between vocabulary knowledge and L2 Reading/listening comprehension: a meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research 26(4): 696–725.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.00 MB

0.21 MB