How Do Different Forms of Glossing Contribute to L2 Vocabulary Learning from Reading?: A Meta-Regression Analysis

Autor/inn/en	Yanagisawa, Akifumi; Webb, Stuart; Uchihara, Takumi
Titel	How Do Different Forms of Glossing Contribute to L2 Vocabulary Learning from Reading?: A Meta-Regression Analysis
Quelle	In: Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42 (2020) 2, S.411-438 (28 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Yanagisawa, Akifumi)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0272-2631
DOI	10.1017/S0272263119000688
Schlagwörter	Meta Analysis; Second Language Learning; Second Language Instruction; Reading Comprehension; Recall (Psychology); Reading Materials; Vocabulary Development; Teaching Methods; Pretests Posttests; Native Language; Language Proficiency; Achievement Gains; Word Recognition; Reading Tests; Language Tests; Multiple Choice Tests + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Meta-analysis; Metaanalyse; Zweitsprachenerwerb; Fremdsprachenunterricht; Leseverstehen; Abberufung; Wortschatzarbeit; Teaching method; Lehrmethode; Unterrichtsmethode; Language skill; Language skills; Sprachkompetenz; Achievement gain; Leistungssteigerung; Worterkennung; Lesetest; Language test; Sprachtest; Multiple choice examinations; Multiple-choice tests, Multiple-choice examinations; Multiple-Choice-Verfahren
Abstract	This meta-analysis investigated the overall effects of glossing on L2 vocabulary learning from reading and the influence of potential moderator variables: gloss format (type, language, mode) and text and learner characteristics. A total of 359 effect sizes from 42 studies (N = 3802) meeting the inclusion criteria were meta-analyzed. The results indicated that glossed reading led to significantly greater learning of words (45.3% and 33.4% on immediate and delayed posttests, respectively) than nonglossed reading (26.6% and 19.8%). Multiple-choice glosses were the most effective, and in-text glosses and glossaries were the least effective gloss types. L1 glosses yielded greater learning than L2 glosses. We found no interaction between language (L1, L2) and proficiency (beginner, intermediate, advanced), and no significant difference among modes of glossing (textual, pictorial, auditory). Learning gains were moderated by test formats (recall, recognition, other), comprehension of text, and proficiency. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Cambridge University Press. 100 Brook Hill Drive, West Nyack, NY 10994. Tel: 800-872-7423; Tel: 845-353-7500; Fax: 845-353-4141; e-mail: subscriptions_newyork@cambridge.org; Web site: https://journals.cambridge.org
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01