Using the peabody picture vocabulary test in L2 children and adolescents: effects of L1

Abstract

This study investigated to what extent the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-4) is a reliable tool for measuring vocabulary knowledge of English as a second language (L2), and to what extent L1 characteristics affect test outcomes. The PPVT-4 was administered to Dutch pupils in six different age groups (4-15 years old) who were or were not following an English educational programme at school. Our first finding was that the PPVT-4 was not a reliable measure for pupils who were correct on maximally 24 items, but it was reliable for pupils who performed better. Second, both primary-school and secondary-school pupils performed better on items for which the phonological similarity between the English word and its Dutch translation was higher. Third, young unexperienced L2 learners' scores were predicted by Dutch lexical frequency, while older more experienced pupils' scores were predicted by English frequency. These findings indicate that the PPVT may be inappropriate for use with L2 learners with limited L2 proficiency. Furthermore, comparisons of PPVT scores across learners with different L1s are confounded by effects of L1 frequency and L1-L2 similarity. The PPVT-4 is however a suitable measure to compare more proficient L2 learners who have the same L1.

Learning English Through Out‐of‐School Exposure: How Do Word‐Related Variables and Proficiency Influence Receptive Vocabulary Learning?

“…Based on findings from receptive multilingualism and the study by Goriot et al. (), we hypothesized that cognateness and L1 frequency would explain more variance within the group of lower‐level learners because they might rely more on what they knew from their L1 than would the more advanced learners, who might rely more on their L2 knowledge.…”

“…Goriot et al. () explored the link between word variables related to the first language (L1) and the results on a L2 vocabulary test. The authors tested Dutch learners of English in six different age groups and found that pupils scored higher on test items that were similar to their Dutch translation.…”

“…We assumed that all the item‐related variables listed in the first research question would play a role in word learning. We expected cognates to facilitate word learning, given that similarity to L1 words is the first thing that children with low proficiency in L2 can rely on and given that previous research has found that cognates facilitate vocabulary learning (De Groot & Keijzer, ; Goriot et al., ; Palmberg, ; Vanhove & Berthele, ). We also expected L2 word frequency to play a role, because many studies in vocabulary learning have shown its importance.…”

“…The study by Goriot et al. () showed that L1 frequency might play a role as well, particularly at the initial stages of L2 learning. Elgort and Warren () showed that concreteness was another significant variable in contextual word learning, and we expected concrete words to be learned more easily than abstract words.…”

Cross-language distance influences receptive vocabulary outcomes of bilingual children

“…Carrying over of phonological knowledge exemplifies the second type of transfer. Evidence for the transfer of language-specific phonological knowledge has been demonstrated in a recent study on Dutch-speaking children who learn English as a second language (L2) in early foreign language education (Goriot et al, 2018). The children who participated in this study performed better on items of the English version of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test (PPVT-III; Dunn & Dunn, 1997), which is a standardized measure of receptive vocabulary, if they are phonologically similar: the closer the English word and its Dutch translation are, the easier the English items are for Dutch-speaking children.…”