Testing Vocabulary Knowledge: Size, Strength, and Computer Adaptiveness.

By B. Laufer, Zahava Goldstein. 2004

688 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Developmental and Educational Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/5145108ef5e7054e28283668cae6a5ca61814ede

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Artificial Intelligence

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

Citations in the corpus

Retention of new words: Quantity of encounters, quality of task, and degree of knowledge (2015, background): “These degrees of knowledge were shown to be implicationally scaled in terms of difficulty (Laufer & Goldstein, 2004).”
Incidental vocabulary learning in a natural reading context: an eye-tracking study (2017, background): “This is what Laufer, Elder, Hill, and Congdon (2004) and Laufer and Goldstein (2004) did in two test validation studies.”
Receptive vocabulary size and its relationship to EFL language skills (2018, background): “Authors such as Read (2000) or Laufer and Goldstein (2004) have also claimed that vocabulary size can be a good predictor of classroom language performance.”
How Many Words Do We Know? Practical Estimates of Vocabulary Size Dependent on Word Definition, the Degree of Language Input and the Participant’s Age (2016, background): “The diﬀerence between receptive and productive word knowledge increases as the words become less frequent/familiar (Laufer and Goldstein, 2004; Schmitt, 2008; Shin et al., 2011).”
Form-focused Instruction in Second Language Vocabulary Learning: A Case for Contrastive Analysis and Translation (2008, background): “This task is more demanding than any other vocabulary task which requires recall of word meaning, recognition of word form, or recognition of word meaning (Laufer et al. 2004; Laufer and Goldstein 2004).”
The assessment of deep word knowledge in young first and second language learners (2008, methodology): “It is the test-taker’s task to identify the four related words, as in this example (Read, 1993, p. 359): 2Another interesting development is a computer-adaptive test for the strength of the form-meaning relationship, as reported by Laufer and Goldstein (2004).”
Low-Income Immigrant Pupils Learning Vocabulary through Digital Picture Storybooks. (2010, background): “It seems plausible that word identification (receptive vocabulary knowledge) precedes production of semantic content (expressive vocabulary knowledge) (e.g., Henriksen, 1999; Laufer & Goldstein, 2004; Melka, 1997; Nation, 2001; Van Kleeck, 2003).”
Predicting L2 reading proficiency with modalities of vocabulary knowledge: A bootstrapping approach (2020, background): “As Laufer and Goldstein (2004) argued, “Language learners who can recall the meaning of a given word can [also] typically recognize the meaning among several options” (p. 408).”
Deliberate Learning and Vocabulary Acquisition in a Second Language (2011, background): “The ability to retrieve a word when its meaning is provided in a decontextualized dictation task is considered to be an indication of the highest degree of explicit knowledge of the word and controlled access to this knowledge (Coady, Carrell, & Nation, 1985; Laufer & Goldstein, 2004).”
Understanding vocabulary acquisition, instruction, and assessment: A research agenda (2019, background): “There have been many studies which compared ‘receptive’ and ‘productive’ knowledge, but they have mainly looked at only the form-meaning link (e.g. Fan, 2000; Laufer & Goldstein, 2004).”
Scoring Yes–No vocabulary tests: Reaction time vs. nonword approaches (2012, background): “However, this form–meaning link develops over time, and can have different degrees of ‘strength’ (Laufer & Goldstein, 2004).”
Size and Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge: What the Research Shows (2014, methodology): “The Computer Adaptive Test of Size and Strength test (CATSS; Laufer & Goldstein, 2004; see Appendix S1 of the Supporting Information online) allows the comparison of knowledge of form versus meaning.”
Comparing Focus on Form and Focus on Forms in Second-Language Vocabulary Learning. (2006, background): “For a survey of earlier studies on intentional learning of vocabulary, see Nation (1982). How do these figures compare with learning vocabulary without form-focused instruction? No doubt some vocabulary is learnt, at least partially, from exposure to input or during communicative activities without ”
The relationship between three measures of L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading (2018, background): “Receptive and productive word knowledge It is broadly accepted that there is a distinction between receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge (Fan, 2000; Laufer & Goldstein 2004; Nation, 2001; Webb, 2005, 2008).”