| Title: |
How Does Lexical Coverage Affect the Processing of L2 Texts? |
| Language: |
English |
| Authors: |
Ana Pellicer-Sánchez (ORCID 0000-0002-9401-7027); Stuart Webb (ORCID 0000-0002-8297-4997); Andi Wang (ORCID 0000-0002-7228-1150) |
| Source: |
Applied Linguistics. 2024 45(6):953-972. |
| Availability: |
Oxford University Press. Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, UK. Tel: +44-1865-353907; Fax: +44-1865-353485; e-mail: jnls.cust.serv@oxfordjournals.org; Web site: http://applij.oxfordjournals.org/ |
| Peer Reviewed: |
Y |
| Page Count: |
20 |
| Publication Date: |
2024 |
| Document Type: |
Journal Articles; Reports - Research |
| Descriptors: |
Vocabulary Development; Reading Comprehension; Cognitive Processes; English (Second Language); Second Language Learning; Attention; Knowledge Level |
| DOI: |
10.1093/applin/amae062 |
| ISSN: |
0142-6001; 1477-450X |
| Abstract: |
Lexical coverage, i.e. the extent to which words in a text are known, is considered an important predictor of reading comprehension, with studies suggesting 98% lexical coverage leads to adequate comprehension. However, no studies to date have examined how the various lexical coverage percentages suggested in the literature are reflected by the cognitive effort involved in processing text and the attention that is devoted to the unknown vocabulary. This study used eye-tracking to examine how lexical coverage affects the processing of text (global measures) and unknown vocabulary (word-level measures), as well as the relationship between processing time on unknown vocabulary and learning. Advanced L2 learners of English read a text in one of four lexical coverage conditions (90%, 95%, 98%, 100%) while their eye movements were recorded. Knowledge of unknown pseudowords in the texts was assessed via an immediate, meaning recall post-test. Results showed that only one of the three global measures examined showed a processing advantage for the 98% condition, reflected by longer saccades and less effortful reading than the 90% and 95% conditions. Crucially, lexical coverage did not have a significant impact on the amount of attention spent on unknown vocabulary. Processing times were found to significantly predict vocabulary gains. |
| Abstractor: |
As Provided |
| Entry Date: |
2024 |
| Accession Number: |
EJ1452570 |
| Database: |
ERIC |