How does lexical coverage affect the processing of L2 texts?

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.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Applied Linguistics
Published
2024-10-25
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amae062
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.58
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How does lexical coverage affect the processing of L2 texts?

Ana Pellicer‐Sánchez, Andi Wang, Stuart Webb
2 citations
Applied Linguistics
Second Language Acquisition and Learning
1.58
article

How does lexical coverage affect the processing of L2 texts?

Ana Pellicer‐Sánchez, Andi Wang, Stuart Webb
article en
2 citations

Abstract

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.

Applied LinguisticsVol. 45(6)
Beijing Foreign Studies University (CN), Western University (CA), University College London (GB), Bedford College (GB)
Openalex Percentile: Top 15%
Second Language Acquisition and Learning
1.58
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.

How does lexical coverage affect the processing of L2 texts? — Ana Pellicer‐Sánchez, Andi Wang, et al. · Applied Linguistics (2024) | TGRS Research Map | TGRS