Correlations of modalities of written vocabulary knowledge to listening and reading proficiency: A comparison

Abstract

In recent years, there has been increasing debate and research regarding which modality of vocabulary knowledge has the strongest correlation to reading, with particular focus on distinctions between testing L2 form and L2 meaning, and between recall of answers from memory and recognition of answers from fixed options. However, relatively little attention has been paid to find out which modality has the strongest correlation to listening ability. A recent meta-analysis by Zhang and Zhang (2020) indicated that meaning recall was the superior predictor of reading proficiency. Although their results showed that form recall had the highest correlation to listening, the difference between form recall and meaning recall was statistically insignificant. The present study uses data from McLean et al. (2020) of learner responses to 1000-item vocabulary tests employing written tests of meaning recall, form recall, meaning recognition and Yes/No modalities, sampling them with replacement to create thousands of 100-item tests using a bootstrapping approach. The test scores were then correlated to measures of listening and reading proficiency for comparison. The results indicated that for written tests, meaning recall, form recall, meaning recognition and form recognition had the strongest correlations to both reading and listening, in descending order. All comparisons were statistically significant.

Using structural equation modeling to examine the relationship between receptive vocabulary knowledge and receptive language proficiency: A new light on an old issue

“…with other studies that employed correlation coefficients to investigate the cross-modality relationship between word knowledge and comprehension (Ha, 2021b;Stewart et al, 2021). These findings could be considered an addition to González-Fernández's (2022) claim concerning "the unidimensionality of vocabulary knowledge in a second language" (p. 1).…”

“…These quintessential language skills involve a complicated set of linguistic and non‐linguistic constituents (Cheng et al., 2022; van den Bosch et al., 2020). Among these various linguistic components, vocabulary knowledge has long been believed to be the most important factor, and the link between vocabulary knowledge and comprehension has always been the center of attention in the literature (McLean et al., 2020; Raeisi‐Vanani & Baleghizadeh, 2022; Stewart et al., 2021; Zhang & Zhang, 2022).…”

“…In recent years, the field of vocabulary studies has witnessed a discussion on the cross‐modality relationship between receptive vocabulary knowledge and receptive language skills (Cheng & Matthews, 2018; Stewart et al., 2021). Theoretically, the orthographic or auditory modalities of vocabulary measures are sensitive to the respective modalities of L2 comprehension tests (Milton, 2009; Read, 2000).…”

“…Interestingly, despite the theoretical criticism, both modalities of word knowledge have been found to correlate strongly with both listening and reading comprehension (Ha, 2021b; Stewart et al., 2021; Zhang & Zhang, 2022). In addition, there are solid evidence showing that these correlations, whether between similar or different modalities, are very close (Ha, 2021b; Stewart et al., 2021; Zhang & Zhang 2022).…”

Aural single‐word and aural phrasal verb knowledge and their relationships to L2 listening comprehension

“…The selection of the meaning-recall test format was made for several reasons. Firstly, the decision was a conscious move away from the multiple-choice format which is prone to overestimation of vocabulary knowledge (Kremmel & Schmitt, 2016;McLean, Stewart, & Batty, 2020;Stewart, McLean, & Kramer, 2017;Stewart, Stoeckel, McLean, Nation, & Pinchbeck, 2021;Stoeckel et al, 2019;Zhang & Zhang, 2020). Fluent, real-world reading and listening requires quick recognition of the word form, and automatic recall and retrieval of the corresponding meaning (Kremmel & Schmitt, 2016), without the benefit of an "options menu" (Nation & Webb, 2011, p. 378) and is, therefore, substantially different from multiple choice.…”