Inicio
todoELE
  • Inicio
  • Materiales
    • πŸ“‹ Actividades
    • πŸ“ Conjugación
    • πŸ“Š Corpus
    • πŸ“” Diccionarios
    • βœ… Evaluación
    • βš™οΈ Gramática
    • πŸ“— Manuales
    • ✍️ Ortografía
    • πŸ“… Programación
    • πŸ—£οΈ Pronunciación
    • πŸ“ Recursos
    • πŸ”€ Vocabulario
  • Formación
    • πŸ“š Bibliografía
    • πŸ‘₯ Congresos
    • πŸŽ“ Cursos
    • 🏫 Centros
    • 🏒 Organizaciones
    • πŸ“° Revistas
    • 🌍 Atlas de ELE
  • Trabajo
    • πŸ’Ό Ofertas de trabajo
    • ℹ️ Trabajo - Recursos
  • En la red
    • 🌐 Sitios ELE
    • πŸ“° Agregador
    • πŸ“§ Formespa
  • Tecnología
    • πŸ’» Herramientas digitales
  • Comunidad
    • πŸ“° Actualidad ELE
    • 😊 Anécdotas ELE
    • πŸ“ Blog
    • πŸ“ŒTablón de anuncios
  • Buscar

Ruta de navegación

  • Inicio
  • πŸ“š Bibliografía
  • The effects of task type and word processing on incidental vocabulary learning: an eye-tracking extension of Hill and Laufer (2003)

The effects of task type and word processing on incidental vocabulary learning: an eye-tracking extension of Hill and Laufer (2003)

Xiaoke Bai
Barry Lee Reynolds
Brian V. Rusk
2026
Language Teaching Research
1-33
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10…
https://doi.org/10.1177/136216882614163…
artículo
investigación
aprendizaje de vocabulario

Texto completo

While research suggests that vocabulary learning through task completion is more effective than direct instruction, the underlying cause of this advantage—whether task involvement load (IL) or time spent on tasks—remains unclear. Extending the work of Hill and Laufer (2003, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 41, 87–106), this study examines the effects of IL and employs eye-tracking to investigate how time spent on tasks, target words, and context, as well as regressions to targets, influence incidental vocabulary acquisition. Seventy-three second-language (L2) English learners were randomly assigned to a control (n = 24) or one of three conditions: reading-only task (n = 16; low IL), meaning-oriented task (n = 16; low IL), and form-oriented task (n = 17; mid IL). Participants completed a pretest, an immediate posttest and a 2-week delayed posttest assessing receptive form knowledge (recognition) and receptive form–meaning relation knowledge (recall and recognition). Eye movement data were collected to measure time on task and processing of target words. Results generally align with the predictions of the IL hypothesis that higher IL led to better learning, and indicate vocabulary acquisition was not solely attributed to time on task. Notably, time spent processing the context was negatively associated with recall of receptive form–meaning relation knowledge (retention), and regressions to the targets negatively affected receptive form knowledge (learning). Methodologically, this study demonstrates the potential of integrating online and offline measures for a deeper understanding of L2 vocabulary acquisition. The findings support the pedagogical value of form-oriented vocabulary tasks, such as fill-in-the-blanks, in enhancing incidental vocabulary learning when tailored to learners’ needs.

  • Inicie sesión para enviar comentarios

Enviar publicación

Contenidos relacionados

  • AI chatbot-assisted vocabulary learning: Relationships with self-regulation, motivation, and performance among Chinese private college students
  • Aprendizaje de léxico en español como segunda lengua/lengua extranjera: Investigación sobre la efectividad de tres tipos de actividades para aprender vocabulario
  • Teachers' voices on multimodal input for second or foreign language learning
  • La lengua de explicación en la presentación del vocabulario y sus efectos en la adquisición léxica en español LE/L2
  • The impact of cognate vocabulary on explicit L2 rule learning
  • Does writing words in notes contribute to vocabulary learning?
Sobre Todoele Índice Publica Contacto: todoele@gmail.com
Política de privacidad Créditos