Skip to content
Licensed Unlicensed Requires Authentication Published online by De Gruyter Mouton May 13, 2022

Role of individual differences in incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through listening to stories: metacognitive awareness and motivation

Hye Won Shin ORCID logo, Sarah Sok ORCID logo and Juhyun Do ORCID logo

Abstract

This study examined the moderating role of two individual difference factors, metacognitive awareness of listening and motivation, in young second language (L2) learners’ incidental vocabulary acquisition from listening to stories. Participants were 66 fifth-grade English as a Foreign Language learners in South Korea who were randomly assigned to one of two groups: listening to stories or control. A vocabulary meaning recognition test was administered as a pretest, posttest, and delayed posttest. Self-reported questionnaires were employed to assess participants’ metacognitive awareness and motivation. Metacognitive awareness of listening, or more specifically, mental translation strategies, were shown to moderate the effects of treatment such that L2 learners who indicated greater awareness of translation strategies learned more vocabulary from listening to stories than L2 learners who had less awareness of these strategies. Motivation also moderated the effects of treatment such that L2 learners who had higher intrinsic motivation to learn English were able to acquire more vocabulary through listening to stories than learners who were less motivated.


Corresponding author: Juhyun Do, Jangdong Elementary School, 112, Dalgubeol-daero 304-gil, Dalseo-gu, Daegu 42687, South Korea, E-mail:

Appendix A

Part of speech and frequency of occurrence of the target words.

Target word Parts of speech Frequency
1. cadet noun 1
2. capture verb 2
3. chase verb 1
4. decorate verb 1
5. feed verb 4
6. general noun 2
7. ground noun 1
8. hop verb 1
9. little adjective 2
10. mad adj 8
11. plant noun 1
12. pour verb 1
13. ready adjective 2
14. refrigerator noun 1
15. remind verb 1
16. soap noun 2
17. tickle verb 1
18. trim verb 1
19. wagon noun 1
20. zookeeper noun 2

Appendix B

Test of meaning recognition.

1. capture He captured the mouse. (a) 잡다 (b) 놓아주다 (c) 사진찍다 (d) 던지다
2. remind I will remind you of the date. (a) 데려가다 (b) 신청하다 (c) 생각하다 (d) 알려주다
3. zookeeper I talked to the zookeeper. (a) 간호사 (b) 사육사 (c) 경찰 (d) 의사
4. ground The ground was flat. (a) (b) (c) 언덕 (d) 지구
5. plant The plant was growing quickly. (a) 동물 (b) 식물 (c) 야채 (d) 과일
6. trim I want to trim my hair. (a) 다듬다 (b) 염색하다 (c) 파마하다 (d) 올리다
7. little A little fly was in my room. (a) 뚱뚱한 (b) 강한 (c) (d) 작은/조금
8. pour I pour the milk. (a) 마시다 (b) 데우다 (c) 따르다 (d) 먹다
9. soap I used a lot of soap. (a) 비누 (b) 샴푸 (c) 지우개 (d) 분필
10. ready Are you ready? (a) 준비된 (b) 빠른 (c) 급한 (d) 느린
11. chase The cat chases the mouse. (a) 잡아먹다 (b) 놀리다 (c) 괴롭히다 (d) 쫓다
12. cadet He was a cadet. (a) 검사 (b) 소방관 (c) 변호사 (d) 사관생도
13. decorate She likes to decorate her room. (a) 청소하다 (b) 정리하다 (c) 치우다 (d) 꾸미다
14. mad I was mad. (a) 화난 (b) 기쁜 (c) 신나는 (d) 슬픈
15. hop Let’s see who can hop the farthest. (a) 눕다 (b) 뛰다 (c) 걷다 (d) 달리다
16. feed He feeds the children. (a) 옷입히다 (b) 놀아준다 (c) 씻겨준다 (d) 먹여준다
17. general The general gave his orders. (a) 의장 (b) 장군 (c) 순경 (d) 상사
18. tickle He likes to tickle his brother. (a) 놀리다 (b) 괴롭히다 (c) 때리다 (d) 간지르다
19. wagon My dad built a wagon. (a) 자전거 (b) 비행기 (c) 거위 (d) 마차
20. refrigerator I looked in the refrigerator. (a) 옷장 (b) 세탁기 (c) 냉장고 (d) 신발장

Appendix C

In order to estimate the treatment effect and interaction effects of mental translation subscale scores, we fitted the following OLS regression model (see Table 2):

RCOG i = β 0 + β 1 TRT i + β 2 RCOG i + β 3 GMRT i + β 4 MENT i + β 5 TRT X  MENT i + ε i

where RCOG i represents the outcome score for the learner i. Coefficient β 0 is the intercept for student i and coefficient β 1 represents the main treatment effects in regard to learner i. Coefficients β 2, β 3, and β 4 represent the covariates, initial knowledge of target words (RCOG i ), prior general vocabulary knowledge (GMRTi), and scores on the mental translation subscale of the MALQ (MENT i ), respectively, for learner i which were included in order to improve the precision of the estimation. β 5 represents the fitted slope parameter associated with the interaction effects of the listening condition and mental translation subscale scores. Residual ε i is the error term for student i.

The regression model that we fitted to gauge the effects of treatment and the interaction effects of motivation (see Table 3) was:

RCOG i = β 0 + β 1 TRT i + β 2 RCOG i + β 3 GMRT i + β 4 ESMS i + β 5 TRT X  ESMS i + ε i

The two regression models in Tables 2 and 3 are similar in that both models estimated the same vocabulary outcomes at immediate and delayed posttests. The primary difference is that instead of MENT scores as a predictor, the model in Table 3 uses motivation (ESMS), and the interaction effects of treatment and motivation as predictors (i.e., see Table 3).

References

Agresti, Alan & Barbara Finlay. 2009. Statistical methods for the social sciences, 4th edn. Upper Saddle River: Pearson.Search in Google Scholar

Barclay, Samuel & Norbert Schmitt. 2019. Current perspectives on vocabulary teaching and learning. In Xuesong Gao (ed.), Second handbook of English language teaching, 799–819. Cham: Springer International Publishing.10.1007/978-3-030-02899-2_42Search in Google Scholar

Barcroft, Joe. 2004. Second language vocabulary acquisition: A lexical input processing approach. Foreign Language Annals 37(2). 200–208. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.19449720.2004.tb02193.x.Search in Google Scholar

Bloom, Howard S., Lashawn Richburg-Hayes & Alison R. Black. 2007. Using covariates to improve precision for studies that randomize schools to evaluate educational interventions. Educational Evaluation & Policy Analysis 29(1). 30–59. https://doi.org/10.3102/0162373707299550.Search in Google Scholar

Chen, Chuntien & John Truscott. 2010. The effects of repetition and L1 lexicalization on incidental vocabulary acquisition. Applied Linguistics 31(5). 693–713. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amq031.Search in Google Scholar

Chou, Mu-hsuan. 2014. Assessing English vocabulary and enhancing young English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners’ motivation through games, songs, and stories. Education 3–13 42(3). 284–297. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2012.680899.Search in Google Scholar

Craik, Fergus. I. M. & Robert S. Lockhart. 1972. Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 11(6). 671–684. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(72)80001-X.Search in Google Scholar

Cross, Jeremy. 2015. Metacognition in L2 listening: Clarifying instructional theory and practice. TESOL Quarterly 49(4). 883–892. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.258.Search in Google Scholar

Deci, Edward L. & Richard M. Ryan. 1985. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York: Plenum Press.10.1007/978-1-4899-2271-7Search in Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2006. Individual differences in second language acquisition. AILA Review 19(1). 42–68. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.19.05dor.Search in Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Zoltán. 2009. The L2 motivational self system. In Zoltán Dörnyei & Ema Ushioda (eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self, 9–42. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847691293-003Search in Google Scholar

Ellis, Rod. 2004. Individual differences in second language learning. In Alan Davies & Catherine Elder (eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics, 525–551. Oxford: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470757000.ch21Search in Google Scholar

Feng, Yanxue & Stuart Webb. 2020. Learning vocabulary through reading, listening, and viewing: Which mode of input is most effective? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 42(3). 499–523. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000494.Search in Google Scholar

Fernandez-Fontecha, Alumudena & Melania T. Gallego. 2012. The role of motivation and age in vocabulary knowledge. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics 9. 39–62.Search in Google Scholar

Flavell, John H. 1979. Metacognition and cognitive monitoring: A new area of cognitive development enquiry. American Psychologist 34. 906–911.10.1037/0003-066X.34.10.906Search in Google Scholar

Gardner, Robert C. 1985. Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. London: Edward Arnold Publishers.Search in Google Scholar

Gardner, Robert C. & Wallace E. Lambert. 1959. Motivational variables in second-language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology 13(4). 26–72.10.1037/h0083787Search in Google Scholar

Gardner, Robert C. & Wallace E. Lambert. 1972. Attitudes and motivation in second language learning. Rowley: Newbury House.Search in Google Scholar

Gardner, Robert C. & Peter D. MacIntyre. 1991. An instrumental motivation in language study: Who says it isn’t effective? Studies in Second Language Acquisition 13(1). 57–72. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100009724.Search in Google Scholar

Goh, Christine C. M. & Guangwei Hu. 2014. Exploring the relationship between metacognitive awareness and listening performance with questionnaire data. Language Awareness 23(3). 255–274. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2013.769558.Search in Google Scholar

Guay, Frédéric, Julien Chanal, Catherine F. Ratelle, Herbert W. Marsh, Simon Larose & Michel Boivin. 2010. Intrinsic, identified, and controlled types of motivation for school subjects in young elementary school children. British Journal of Educational Psychology 80(4). 711–735. https://doi.org/10.1348/000709910X499084.Search in Google Scholar

Hair, Joseph F., Bill Black, Barry Babin, Rolph Anderson & Ronald L. Tatham. 2006. Multivariate data analysis, 6th edn. Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.Search in Google Scholar

Hayes, Williams L. 1963. Statistics for psychologists. New York: Holt Rinehart & Winston.Search in Google Scholar

Hennebry, Mairin, Vivienne Rogers, Ernesto Macaro & Victoria Murphy. 2017. Direct teaching of vocabulary after listening: Is it worth the effort and what method is best? Language Learning Journal 45(3). 282–300. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2013.849751.Search in Google Scholar

Hulstijn, Jan H. 2003. Incidental and intentional learning. In Catherine J. Doughty & Michael H. Long (eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition, 349–381. Malden: Blackwell.10.1002/9780470756492.ch12Search in Google Scholar

Jiang, Nan. 2002. Form-meaning mapping in vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 24(4). 617–637.10.1017/S0272263102004047Search in Google Scholar

Jin, Zhouhan & Stuart Webb. 2020. Incidental vocabulary learning through listening to teacher talk. The Modern Language Journal 104(3). 550–566. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12661.Search in Google Scholar

Krashen, Stephen. 1989. We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. The Modern Language Journal 73(4). 440–464. https://doi.org/10.2307/326879.Search in Google Scholar

Laufer, Batia & Nany Girsai. 2008. Form-focused instruction in second language vocabulary learning: A case for contrastive analysis and translation. Applied Linguistics 29(4). 694–716. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amn018.Search in Google Scholar

Laufer, Batia & Jan H Hulstijn. 2001. Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics 22(1). 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/22.1.1.Search in Google Scholar

MacGinitie, Walter H., Ruth K. MacGinitie, Katherine Maria & Lois G. Dreyer. 2000. Gates-MacGinitie reading test, 4th edn. Itasca: Riverside Publishing Company.Search in Google Scholar

Masgoret, Anne-Marie & Robert C. Gardner. 2003. Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning 53(1). 167–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00227.Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, Mercer. 2003. Just go to bed. New York: A Golden Book.Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, Mercer. 2006a. All by myself. New York: A Golden Book.Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, Mercer. 2006b. I just forgot. New York: A Golden Book.Search in Google Scholar

Mayer, Mercer. 2006c. I was so mad. New York: A Golden Book.Search in Google Scholar

McNamara, Danielle, Arthur C. Graesser, Philip M. McCarthy & Zhiqiang Cai. 2014. Automated evaluation of text and discourse with Coh-Metrix. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511894664Search in Google Scholar

Nation, Paul. 2006. How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? The Canadian Modern Language Review 63(1). 59–82. https://doi.org/10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59.Search in Google Scholar

Nunnally, Jum C. 1978. Psychometric theory. New York: McGraw-Hill.Search in Google Scholar

Papi, Mostafa. 2018. Motivation as quality: Regulatory fit effects on incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40(4). 707–730. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311700033X.Search in Google Scholar

Pavia, Niousha, Stuart Webb & Farahnaz Faez. 2019. Incidental vocabulary learning through listening to songs. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 41(4). 745–768. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000020.Search in Google Scholar

Pawlak, Miroslaw. 2012. The dynamic nature of motivation in language learning: A classroom perspective. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching 2(2). 249–278. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.2012.2.2.7.Search in Google Scholar

Pellicer-Sánchez, Ana & Norbert Schmitt. 2010. Incidental vocabulary acquisition from an authentic novel: Do things fall apart? Reading in a Foreign Language 22(1). 31–55.Search in Google Scholar

Peters, Elke & Stuart Webb. 2018. Incidental vocabulary acquisition through viewing L2 television and factors that affect learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 40(3). 551–577. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263117000407.Search in Google Scholar

Pujadas, Geòrgia & Carmen Muñoz. 2019. Extensive viewing of captioned and subtitled TV series: A study of L2 vocabulary learning by adolescents. The Language Learning Journal 47(4). 479–496. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2019.1616806.Search in Google Scholar

Pulido, Diana & David Z. Hambrick. 2008. The virtuous circle: Modeling individual differences in L2 reading and vocabulary development. Reading in a Foreign Language 20(2). 164–190.Search in Google Scholar

Robinson, Peter. 2002. Effects of individual differences in intelligence, aptitude and working memory on adult incidental SLA: A replication and extension of Reber, Walkenfield and Hernstadt (1991). In Peter Robinson (ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning, 211–266. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.2.13robSearch in Google Scholar

Rodgers, Michael P. H. & Stuart Webb. 2020. Incidental vocabulary learning through viewing television. International Journal of Applied Linguistics 171(2). 191–220. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.18034.rod.Search in Google Scholar

Schmitt, Norbert & Diane Schmitt. 1995. Vocabulary notebooks: Theoretical underpinnings and practical suggestions. ELT Journal 49(2). 133–143. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/49.2.133.Search in Google Scholar

Sharwood Smith, Michael. 1993. Input enhancement in instructed SLA: Theoretical bases. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 15(2). 165–179. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263100011943.Search in Google Scholar

Shieh, Gwowen. 2009. Detecting interaction effects in moderated regression with continuous variables. Organizational Research Methods 12(3). 510–523. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428108320370.Search in Google Scholar

Skehan, Peter. 1989. Individual differences in second-language learning. London: Edward Arnold.Search in Google Scholar

Sok, Sarah & Hye Won Shin. 2022. Investigating the role of cognitive variables in second language learners’ listening comprehension: Aptitude and metacognitive awareness. International Journal of Listening 36(2). 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/10904018.2021.1954926.Search in Google Scholar

StataCorp. 2019. Stata statistical software: Release 16. College Station: StataCorp.Search in Google Scholar

Taber, Keith S. 2018. The use of Cronbach’s alpha when developing and reporting research instruments in science education. Research in Science Education 48. 1273–1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2.Search in Google Scholar

Tanaka, Mitsuko. 2017. Examining EFL vocabulary learning motivation in a demotivating learning environment. System 65. 130–138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.01.010.Search in Google Scholar

Teng, Mark Feng. 2021. Exploring awareness of metacognitive knowledge and acquisition of vocabulary knowledge in primary grades: A latent growth curve modelling approach. Language Awareness. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2021.1972116.Search in Google Scholar

Teng, Feng & Barry Lee Reynolds. 2019. Effects of individual and group metacognitive prompts on EFL reading comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning. PLoS One 14(5). e0215902. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215902.Search in Google Scholar

Teng, Mark Feng & Danyang Zhang. 2021. Task-induced involvement load, vocabulary learning in a foreign language, and their association with metacognition. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/13621688211008798.Search in Google Scholar

Tremblay, Paul F., Michelle P. Goldberg & Robert C. Gardner. 1995. Trait and state motivation and the acquisition of Hebrew vocabulary. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue Canadienne des Sciences du Comportement 27(3). 356–370. https://doi.org/10.1037/0008-400X.27.3.356.Search in Google Scholar

Tseng, Wen-Ta & Norbert Schmitt. 2008. Toward a model of motivated vocabulary learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Language Learning 58(2). 357–400. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00444.x.Search in Google Scholar

VanPatten, Bill. 1996. Input processing and grammar instruction: Theory and research. Norwood: Ablex.Search in Google Scholar

Van Zeeland, Hilde& Norbert Schmitt. 2013. Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension? Applied Linguistics 34(4). 457–479. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams074.Search in Google Scholar

Vandergrift, Larry & Susan Baker. 2015. Learner variables in second language listening comprehension: An exploratory path analysis. Language Learning 65(2). 390–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12105.Search in Google Scholar

Vandergrift, Larry & Christine C. M. Goh. 2012. Teaching and learning second language listening: Metacognition in action. New York: Routledge.10.4324/9780203843376Search in Google Scholar

Vandergrift, Larry, Christine C. M. Goh, Catherine J. Mareschal & Marzieh H. Tafaghodatari. 2006. The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire (MALQ): Development and validation. Language Learning 56(3). 431–462. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.x.Search in Google Scholar

Vatankhah, Moazam & Nooshin Tanbakooei. 2014. The role of social support on intrinsic and extrinsic motivation among Iranian EFL learners. Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sciences 98. 1912–1918. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2014.03.622.Search in Google Scholar

Vidal, Karina. 2003. Academic listening: A source of vocabulary acquisition? Applied Linguistics 24(1). 56–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.1.56.Search in Google Scholar

Wallace, Mathews & Emily I. L. Leong. 2020. Exploring language learning motivation among primary EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research 11(2). 221–230. https://doi.org/10.17507/jltr.1102.10.Search in Google Scholar

Wang, Yun & Jeanine Treffers-Daller. 2017. Explaining listening comprehension among L2 learners of English: The contribution of general language proficiency, vocabulary knowledge and metacognitive awareness. System 65. 139–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.013.Search in Google Scholar

Webb, Stuart. 2007. The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics 28(1). 46–65. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/aml048.Search in Google Scholar

Webb, Stuart & Michael P. H Rodgers. 2009. The lexical coverage of movies. Applied Linguistics 30(3). 407–427. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp010.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, Pengchong & Suzanne Graham. 2020a. Learning vocabulary through listening: The role of vocabulary knowledge and listening proficiency. Language Learning 70(4). 1017–1053. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12411.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, Pengchong & Suzanne Graham. 2020b. Vocabulary learning through listening: Comparing L2 explanations, teacher codes witching, contrastive focus-on-form and incidental learning. Language Teaching Research 24(6). 765–784. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819829022.Search in Google Scholar

Zhang, Yining, Chin-His Lin, Dongbo Zhang & Yunjeong Choi. 2017. Motivation, strategy, and English as a foreign language vocabulary learning: A structural equation modelling study. British Journal of Educational Psychology 87(1). 57–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12135.Search in Google Scholar

Zhao, Aiping, Ying Guo, Carrie Biales & Arnold Olszewski. 2016. Exploring learner factors in second language (L2) incidental vocabulary acquisition through reading. Reading in a Foreign Language 28(2). 224–245.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-12-03
Accepted: 2022-04-25
Published Online: 2022-05-13

© 2022 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston