Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-sh8wx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-21T18:48:09.602Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The effects of training on automatization of word recognition in English as a foreign language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 April 2008

NOBUHIKO AKAMATSU
NOBUHIKO AKAMATSU*
Affiliation:
Doshisha University
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Nobuhiko Akamatsu, Department of English, Doshisha University, Imadegawa-Karasuma, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto, 602-8580, Japan. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The present study investigated the effects of word-recognition training on the word-recognition processing of learners of English as a foreign language (EFL). Providing 7-week word-recognition training, the study examined whether such training improves EFL learners' word-recognition performance. The main aspects of this study concerned word frequency and working-memory capacity in automatization of word recognition. Analysis of variance and correlational analyses revealed qualitative differences in the improvement of EFL word-recognition performance with respect to word frequency. The improvement in the processing of high-frequency words was associated with simple speedup; conversely, the processing of low-frequency words was associated with automatization. Results also showed that working-memory capacity might not play a noticeable role in improving word-recognition speed or efficiency.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 29 , Issue 2 , April 2008 , pp. 175 - 193
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

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.)

References

REFERENCES

Ackerman, P. (1987). Individual differences in skill learning: An integration of psychometric and information processing perspectives. Psychological Bulletin, 102, 3–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, M. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Akamatsu, N. (1999). The effects of first language orthographic features on word-recognition processing in English as a second language. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11, 381–403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akamatsu, N. (2002). A similarity in word-recognition procedure among L2 readers with different L1 backgrounds. Applied Psycholinguistics, 23, 117–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akamatsu, N. (2003). The effects of first-language orthographic features on second-language reading in text. Language Learning, 53, 207–231.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Akamatsu, N. (2006). Literacy acquisition in Japanese–English bilinguals. In Joshi, R. M. & Aaron, P. G. (Eds.), Handbook of orthography and literacy (pp. 481–496). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Baluch, B., & Besner, D. (1991). Visual word recognition: Evidence for strategic control of lexical and nonlexical routines in oral reading. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 17, 644–652.Google Scholar
Brown, T., & Haynes, M. (1985). Literacy background and reading development in a second language. In Carr, H. (Ed.), The development of reading skills (pp. 19–34). San Francisco, CA: Jossey–Bass.Google Scholar
Carpenter, P., Miyake, A., & Just, M. (1994). Working memory constraints in comprehension: Evidence from individual differences, aphasia, and aging. In Gernsbacher, M. A. (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 1075–1122). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Cohen, J., & Cohen, P. (1983). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Daneman, M., & Carpenter, P. (1980). Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 19, 450–466.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daneman, M., & Merikle, P. (1996). Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 3, 422–433.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
DeKeyser, R. (2001). Automaticity and automatization. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 125–151). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ehri, L. (1991). Development of the ability to read words. In Barr, R., Kamil, M., Mosenthal, P., & Pearson, P. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 383–417). New York: Longman.Google Scholar
Ehri, L. (1992). Reconceptualizing the development of sight word reading and its relationship to recoding. In Gough, P., Ehri, L., & Treiman, R. (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 107–143). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Fukkink, R. G., Hulstijn, J., & Simis, A. (2005). Does training in second-language word recognition skills affect reading comprehension= An experimental study. Modern Language Journal, 89, 54–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gathercole, S., & Baddeley, A. (1993). Working memory and language. Hove: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Harrington, M., & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading ability. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14, 25–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koda, K. (1988). Cognitive process in second language reading: Transfer of L1 reading skills and strategies. Second Language Research, 4, 133–156.Google Scholar
Koda, K. (1990). The use of L1 reading strategies in L2 reading: Effects of L1 orthographic structures on L2 phonological recoding strategies. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12, 393–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koda, K. (1996). L2 word recognition research: A critical review. The Modern Language Journal, 80, 450–460.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kucera, H., & Francis, W. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
MacGinitie, W., & MacGinitie, R. (1992). Gates–MacGinitie reading tests (2nd ed.). Toronto: Nelson Canada.Google Scholar
MacLeod, C. (1991). Half a century of research on the Stroop effect: An integrative review. Psychological Bulletin, 109, 163–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McCusker, L., Hillinger, M., & Bias, R. (1981). Phonological recoding and reading. Psychological Bulletin, 89, 217–245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McLaughlin, B. (1995). Aptitude from an information-processing perspective. Language Testing, 12, 370–387.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moors, A., & De Houwer, J. (2006). Automaticity: A theoretical and conceptual analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 132, 297–326.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nation, P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Perfetti, C. (1992). The representation problem in reading acquisition. In Gough, P., Ehri, L., & Treiman, R. (Eds.), Reading acquisition (pp. 145–174). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. New York: Cambridge University Press. Please cite Read 2000 in the text.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N. (2003). Automaticity and second languages. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 382–408). Malden, MA: Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Hulstijn, J. (2005). Automaticity in bilingualism and second language learning. In Kroll, J. F. (Ed.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 371–388). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N., Poulsen, C., & Segalowitz, S. (1999). RT coefficient variation is differentially sensitive to executive control involvement in an attention switching task. Brain and Cognition, 40, 255–258.Google Scholar
Segalowitz, N., & Segalowitz, S. (1993). Skilled performance, practice, and the differentiation of speedup from automatization effects: Evidence from second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 14, 369–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, N., Watson, V., & Segalowitz, S. J. (1995). Vocabulary skill: Single-case assessment of automaticity of word recognition in a timed lexical decision task. Second Language Research, 11, 121–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Segalowitz, S., Segalowitz, N., & Wood, A. (1998). Assessing the development of automaticity in second language word recognition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 53–67.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M. (1985). The time course of phonological code activation in two writing systems. Cognition, 19, 1–30.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidenberg, M. (1992). Beyond orthographic depth in reading: Equitable division of labor. In Frost, R. & Katz, L. (Eds.), Orthography, phonology, morphology and meaning (pp. 85–118). Amsterdam: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Seidenberg, M., Waters, G., Barnes, M., & Tanenhaus, M. (1984). When does irregular spelling or pronunciation influence word recognition= Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 23, 383–404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Share, D. (1995). Phonological recoding and self-teaching: sine qua non of reading acquisition. Cognition, 55, 151–218.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stanovich, K. (1990). Concepts in developmental theories of reading skill: Cognitive resources, automaticity, and modularity. Developmental Review, 10, 72–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stanovich, K. (1991). Word recognition: Changing perspectives. In Barr, R., Kamil, M., Mosenthal, P., & Pearson, P. D. (Eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 2, pp. 418–452). New York: Longman.Google Scholar