Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T22:56:03.589Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Expert knowledge, distinctiveness, and levels of processing in language learning

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 August 2011

STEVE BIRD
STEVE BIRD*
Affiliation:
United Arab Emirates University
*
ADDRESS FOR CORRESPONDENCE Steve Bird, Department of Linguistics, College of Humanities and Social Sciences, United Arab Emirates University, P.O. Box 17771, Al Ain, United Arab Emirates. E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The foreign language vocabulary learning research literature often attributes strong mnemonic potency to the cognitive processing of meaning when learning words. Routinely cited as support for this idea are experiments by Craik and Tulving (C&T) demonstrating superior recognition and recall of studied words following semantic tasks (“deep” encoding) compared to structure-related tasks (“shallow” encoding). However, participants in C&T were not language learners but native speakers of English studying known English nouns. These experiments have never been directly replicated using nonnatives to establish the relevance of the findings to nonnatives and learners. The present study replicated C&T Experiment 5, comparing effects of shallow and deep encoding tasks on subsequent recognition of target words by native and nonnative speakers of English with equivalent short-term memory function. The results showed depth effects similar to C&T for all participants, indicating that C&T's results do generalize to less proficient speakers of the target language. It is crucial, however, that nonnative speakers of English benefited less from semantic encoding than native speakers, suggesting an effect of preexisting knowledge representations on mnemonic effects derived from semantic processing, and hence, a limit to the relevance of C&T for learners. Results are discussed in terms of the constructs of the mental lexicon, expert knowledge, distinctiveness and levels of processing in memory research and language learning.

Type
Articles
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 33 , Issue 4 , October 2012 , pp. 665 - 689
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

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

Aitchison, J. (1994). Words in the mind: An introduction to the mental lexicon. London: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52, 323–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, K. S., & Krashen, S. (1994). Acquisition of vocabulary from Sweet Valley Kids Series: Adult ESL acquisition. Journal of Reading, 37, 662–667.Google Scholar
Coady, J., & Huckin, T. (1997). Second language vocabulary acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Craik, F. I. M. (2002). Levels of processing: Past, present . . . and future? Memory, 10, 305–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Craik, F. I. M. (2007). Encoding: A cognitive perspective. In Roediger, H. L., Dudai, Y., & Fitzpatrick, S. M. (Eds.), Science of memory: Concepts (pp. 129–135). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Craik, F. I. M., & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671–684.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Craik, F. I. M., & Tulving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 104, 268–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dijkstra, T. (2007). The multilingual lexicon. In Gareth, M. Gaskell (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 251–265). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Einstein, G. O., & Hunt, R. R. (1980). Levels of processing and organization: Additive effects of individual-item and relational processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6, 588–598.Google Scholar
Erten, I. H., & Tekin, M. (2008). Effects on vocabulary acquisition of presenting new words in semantic sets versus semantically unrelated sets. System, 36, 407–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finkbeiner, M., & Nicol, J. (2003). Semantic category effects in second language word learning. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 369–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fisher, R. P., & Craik, F. I. M. (1977). Interaction between encoding and retrieval operations in cued recall. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 3, 701–711.Google Scholar
Folse, K. S. (2006). The effect of type of written exercise on L2 vocabulary retention. TESOL Quarterly, 40, 273–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gallo, D. A., Meadow, N. G., Johnson, E. L., & Foster, K. T. (2008). Deep levels of processing elicit a distinctiveness heuristic: Evidence from the criteria recollection task. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 1095–1111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gregg, V. H. (1976). Word frequency, recognition, and recall. In Brown, J. (Ed.), Recall and recognition. London: Wiley.Google Scholar
Guo, C., Zhu, Y., Ding, J., Fan, S., & Paller, K. A. (2004). An electrophysiological investigation in memory encoding, depth of processing, and word frequency in humans. Neuroscience Letters, 356, 79–82.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hannon, B., & Craik, F. I. M (2001). Encoding specificity revisited: The role of semantics. Canadian Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 55, 231–243.Google ScholarPubMed
Hasegawa, M., Carpenter, P. A., & Just, M. A. (2002). An fMRI study of bilingual sentence comprehension and workload. NeuroImage, 15, 647–660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hashemi, R. H., & Gowdasiaei, F. (2005). An attribute-treatment interaction study: Lexical-set versus semantically unrelated vocabulary instruction. RELC Journal, 36, 341–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, M., & Laufer, B. (2003). Type of task, time-on-task and electronic dictionaries in incidental vocabulary acquisition. IRAL, 41, 87–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Huckin, T., & Coady, J. (1999). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in second language: A review. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21, 181–193.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. (1992). Retention of inferred and given word meanings: Experiments in incidental vocabulary learning. In Anaud, P. J. & Béjoint, H. (Eds.), Vocabulary and applied linguistics (pp. 113–125). London: Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H., Hollander, M., & Greidanus, T. (1996). Incidental vocabulary learning by advanced foreign language students: The influence of marginal glosses, dictionary use, and reoccurrence of unknown words. Modern Language Journal, 80, 327–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. & Laufer, B. (2001). Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51, 539–558.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, R. R. (2003). Two contributions of distinctive processing to accurate memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 48, 811–825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, R. R., & Einstein, G. O. (1981). Relational and item specific information in memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 20, 497–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hunt, R. R., & Worthen, J. B. (Eds.). (2006). Distinctiveness and memory. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Joe, A. (1998). What effects do text-based tasks promoting generation have on incidental vocabulary acquisition? Applied Linguistics, 19, 357–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keating, G. D. (2008). Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: The involvement hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research, 12, 365–386.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Knight, S. (1994). Dictionary: The tool of last resort in foreign language reading? A new perspective. Modern Language Journal, 78, 285–299.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lockhart, R. S. (2002). Levels of processing, transfer appropriate processing, and the concept of robust encoding. Memory, 10, 397–403.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lockhart, R. S., & Craik, F. I. M. (1990). Levels of processing: A retrospective analysis of a framework for memory research. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 44, 87–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luppescu, S., & Day, R. R. (1993). Reading, dictionaries, and vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 43, 263–287.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, K. J. (2008). Recognition memory: A review of the critical findings and an integrated theory for relating them. Cognitive Psychology, 57, 335–384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Malmberg, K. J., Steyvers, M., Stephens, J. D., & Shiffrin, R. M. (2002). Feature-frequency effects in recognition memory. Memory & Cognition, 30, 607–613.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meara, P. (1997). Towards a new approach to modelling vocabulary acquisition. In Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 109–121). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Meara, P. (2009). Connected words: Word associations and second language vocabulary acquisition. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miller, G. (1956). The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychological Review, 63, 81–97.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moonen, M. L. I., De Graaff, R., & Westhoff, G. J. (2006). Focused tasks, mental actions and second language teaching: Cognitive and connectionist accounts of task effectiveness. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 152, 35–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morris, C., Bransford, J. D., & Franks, J. J. (1977). Levels of processing versus transfer appropriate processing. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 16, 519–533.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moscovitch, M., & Craik, F. I. M. (1976). Depth of processing, retrieval cues, and uniqueness of encoding as factors in recall. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15, 447–458.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2000). Learning vocabulary in lexical sets: Dangers and guidelines. TESOL Journal, 9, 6–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyberg, L. (2002). Levels of processing: A view from function brain imagining. Memory, 10, 345–348.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Otten, L. J., Henson, R. N., & Rugg, M. D. (2001). Depth of processing effects on neural correlates of memory encoding: Relationship between findings from across- and within-task comparisons. Brain, 124, 399–412.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pressley, M., Levin, J. R., & Miller, G E. (1982). The keyword method compared to alternative vocabulary learning strategies. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 7, 50–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rawson, K. A., & Van Overschelde, J. P. (2008). How does knowledge promote memory? The distinctiveness theory of skilled memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 58, 646–668.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
RoedigerH. L., III H. L., III, & Gallo, D. A. (2002). Levels of processing: Some unanswered questions. In Naveh-Benjamin, M., Moscovitch, M., & Roediger, III, H. L. (Eds.), Perspectives on human memory and cognitive aging: Essays in honour of Fergus Craik (pp. 28–47). Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Rohrer, D., & Pashler, H. (2007). Increasing retention without increasing study time. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 183–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sagarra, N., & Alba, M. (2006). The key is in the keyword: L2 vocabulary learning methods with beginning learners of Spanish. Modern Language Journal, 90, 228–243.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmitt, N. (2008). Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12, 329–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scribner, G. (2000). The effects of three methods of vocabulary memorization in second language acquisition: Rote memorization, mnemonics, and network of conceptual relations. Unpublished master's thesis, Brigham Young University.Google Scholar
Sokman, A. (1997). Current trends in teaching second language vocabulary. In Schmitt, N. & McCarthy, M. (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 237–257). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Thorndike, E. L., & Lorge, I. (1944). The Teacher's word book of 30,000 words. New York: Teachers College, Columbia University.Google Scholar
Van Overschelde, J. P., Rawson, K. A., Dunlosky, J., & Hunt, R. R. (2005). Distinctive processing underlies skilled memory. Psychological Science, 16, 358–361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verfaellie, M., Croce, P., & Milberg, W. (1995). The role of episodic memory in semantic learning: An examination of vocabulary acquisition in a patient with amnesia due to encephalitis. Neurocase, 1, 291–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar