Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Variations in Vocabulary Depth Among Second Language Learners with Comparable Vocabulary Breadths: An Empirical Investigation

  • Published:
Journal of Psycholinguistic Research Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The study investigated variation in the depth of vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners at the same vocabulary breadth and the learner-related factors affecting it. Two hundred and thirty-one EFL learners at high and low levels of vocabulary breadth (according to Vocabulary Level Tests) participated in the study. The study tested Vocabulary depth (Word Associates Test and Derivative Word Form Test) and learner-related factors (LLAMA Aptitude Test, Attitude/Motivation Test Battery, Vocabulary Learning Strategies Survey, and Learning Style Inventory). Based on the findings using a paired t-test and Pearson correlations in SPSS and Structural Equation Modelling in AMOS, the study confirmed that (1) learners at the same level of vocabulary breadth (particularly low level) possessed variation in the depth of their vocabulary knowledge (such as meaning-based vs. form-based and receptive vs. productive knowledge) and (2) among the learner-related factors, learners’ language aptitude and motivation had a significant impact on vocabulary depth. Based on the results, the study made some pedagogical suggestions.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. According to College English Curriculum Requirements (2007), 4,780 words are recommended to pass the College English Test, Band 4.

  2. Accommodating type: AC-CE ≦7 and AE-RO≧7; Diverging type: AC-CE≦7 and AE-RO≦6; Converging type: AC-CE≧8 and AE-RO≧7; Assimilating type: AC-CE≧8 and AE-RO≦6.

References

  • Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77–117). International Reading Association. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED203299

  • Anderson, J. R. (2005). Cognitive psychology an its implications (7th ed.). Worth Publishers.

  • Baghban, Z. Z. V. (2012). The relationship between Iranian English language learners’ learning styles and strategies. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 3(4), 771–777. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.3.4.771-777

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barcroft, J. (2007). Effects of opportunities for word retrieval during second language vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 57(1), 35–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2007.00398.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beglar, D. (2010). A Rasch-based validation of the vocabulary size test. Language Testing, 27(1), 101–118.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Binder, K. S., Cote, N. G., Lee, C., Bessette, E., & Vu, H. (2017). Beyond breadth: The contributions of vocabulary depth to reading comprehension among skilled readers. Journal of Research in Reading, 40(3), 333–343.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, L. (2001). Teaching languages to young learners. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, L. (2002). Measuring vocabulary size in English as an additional language. Language Teaching Research, 6(2), 145–173.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Canga Alonso, A. (2013). Receptive vocabulary size of secondary Spanish EFL learners. Revista De Lingüísticay Lenguas Aplicadas, 8(1), 66–75.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chen, C.-P., & Wang, C.-H. (2015). The effects of learning style on mobile augmented-reality-facilitated English vocabulary learning. 2015 IEEE 2nd International Conference on Information Science and Security (pp. 1–4). https://doi.org/10.1109/ICISSEC.2015.7371036

  • Chinese Ministry of Education. (2007). College English curriculum requirements. Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press.

  • Cho, Y. A., & Ahn, S. (2016). The relationship between vocabulary learning strategies and vocabulary size with Korean EFL college students. English21, 29(4), 367–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chu, Z. (2005). Cihui Shuru de “Zhi” yu yingwen xiezuo [The “quality” of vocabulary input and English writing]. Journal of Zhengzhou University of Aeronautics (social Science Edition), 1, 80–81.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daller, H., Milton, J., & Treffers-Daller, J. (Eds.). (2007). Modelling and assessing vocabulary knowledge. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511667268

  • Dóczi, B., & Kormos, J. (2016). Longitudinal developments in vocabulary knowledge and lexical organization. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Dörnyei, Z., & Skehan, P. (2003). Individual differences in second language learning. In C. J. Doughty & M. H. Long (Eds.), The handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 589–630). Wiley Online Library. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315831664

  • Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner: Inidvidual differences in second language acquisition. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

  • Ehrman, M. E., Leaver, B. L., & Oxford, R. L. (2003). A brief overview of individual differences in second language learning. System, 31(3), 313–330. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0346-251X(03)00045-9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ehsanzadeh, S. J. (2020). Assessing threshold level of L2 vocabulary depth in reading comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning. Language Education & Assessment, 3(1), 1–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fan, M. (2000). How big is the gap and how to narrow it? An investigation into the active and passive vocabulary knowledge of L2 learners. RELC Journal, 31(2), 105–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/003368820003100205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fontecha, A. F., & Gallego, M. T. (2012). The role of motivarion and age in vocabulary knowledge. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 9(1), 39–62.

    Google Scholar 

  • Forsberg Lundell, F., & Sandgren, M. (2013). High-level proficiency in late L2 acquisition: Relationships between collocational production, language aptitude and personality. In G. Granena & M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp. 231–256). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, R. C. (1985). Social psychology and second language learning: The role of attitudes and motivation. Edward Arnold.

  • Gardner, R. C. (2004). Attitude/motivation test battery: International AMTB research project (English version). The University of Western Ontario, Canada. http://publish.uwo.ca/~gardner/docs/englishamtb.pdf

  • Gardner, R. C. (2001). Integrative motivation and second language acquisition. Motivation and Second Language Acquisition, 23(1), 1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, R. C., Lalonde, R. N., & Moorcroft, R. (1985). The role of attitudes and motivation in second language learning: Correlational and experimental considerations. Language Leaning, 35(2), 207–227.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second-language acquisition. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 13(4), 266–272.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González Fernández, B., & Schmitt, N. (2020). Word knowledge: Exploring the relationships and order of acquisition of vocabulary knowledge components. Applied Linguistics, 41(4), 481–505.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Granena, G. (2013). Reexamining the robustness of aptitude in second language acquisition. In G. Granena & M. Long (Eds.), Sensitive Periods, Language Aptitude, and Ultimate L2 Attainment (Vol. 35, pp. 179–204). John Benjamins Amsterdam.

  • Granena, G., & Long, M. H. (2012). Age of onset, length of residence, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment in three linguistic domains. Second Language Research, 29(3), 311–343. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658312461497

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gyllstad, H., Vilkaitė, L., & Schmitt, N. (2015). Assessing vocabulary size through multiple-choice formats: Issues with guessing and sampling rates. ITL International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 166, 276–330.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haastrup, K., & Henriksen, B. (2000). Vocabulary acquisition: Acquiring depth of knowledge through network building. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2000.tb00149.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hadley, E. B., Dickinson, D. K., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2019). Building semantic networks: The impact of a vocabulary intervention on preschoolers’ depth of word knowledge. Reading Research Quarterly, 54(1), 41–61.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Halbach, A. (2000). Finding out about students’ learning strategies by looking at their diaries: A case study. System, 28(1), 85–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Huh, J.-H. (2009). Vocabulary learning strategy use and vocabulary proficiency. English Language & Literature Teaching, 15(4), 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kim, Y. (2008). Receptive vocabulary knowledge and productive vocabulary knowledge. English Language & Literature Teaching, 14(3), 283–306.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kolb, A. Y., & Kolb, D. A. (2005). Learning styles and learning spaces: Enhancing experiential learning in higher education. Academy of Management Learning and Education, 4(2), 193–212. https://doi.org/10.5465/AMLE.2005.17268566

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kormos, J. (2013). New conceptualizations of language aptitude in second language attainment. In G. Granena & M. H. Long (Eds.), Sensitive periods, language aptitude, and ultimate L2 attainment (pp. 131–152). John Benjamins.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 54(3), 399–436. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0023-8333.2004.00260.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Laufer, B., & Ravenhorst-Kalovski, G. C. (2010). Lexical threshold revisited: Lexical text coverage, learners’ vocabulary size and reading comprehension. Reading in a Foreign Language, 22(1), 15–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. (2007). Vocabulary learning strategies of Korean university students: Strategy use, vocabulary size, and gender. English Teaching, 62(1), 149–169. https://doi.org/10.15858/engtea.62.1.200703.149

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. (2020). Examining the roles of aptitude, motivation, strategy use, language processing experience, and gender in the development of the breadth and depth of EFL learners’ vocabulary knowledge. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244020977883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S. H., & Muncie, J. (2006). From receptive to productive: Improving ESL learners’ use of vocabulary in a postreading composition task. Tesol Quarterly, 40(2), 295–320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, J. (2022). The relationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and Chinese non-English majors’ L2 lexical inferencing strategy use and success. Cambridge Educational Research E-Journal, 9, 101–117. https://doi.org/10.17863/CAM.90579

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, M., & Kirby, J. R. (2015). The effects of vocabulary breadth and depth on English reading. Applied Linguistics, 36(5), 611–634. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, S. (2016). The construct validity of language aptitude: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(4), 801–842.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li, X. (2007). Cihuiliang, cihui shendu zhishi yu yuyan zonghe nengli guanxi yanjiu [Research on the relationship between vocabulary size, depth of vocabulary knowledge and comprehensive language aptitude]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 39(5), 352–359.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, S. L. (2001). Lun er’yu cihui shendu xide ji fazhan tezheng–guanyu ciyi yu cizhui xide de shizheng diaocha [The in-depth acquisition of L2 vocabulary and its development features–An empirical investigation on the acquisition of word meaning and affixes]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research, 33(6), 436–441.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu, X. F. (2018). The relationship between the depth of vocabulary knowledge and Chinese MA students’ use of vocabulary learning strategy and L2 contact in a study-abroad context. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 22(2), 27–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masgoret, A. M., & Gardner, R. C. (2003). Attitudes, motivation, and second language learning: A meta-analysis of studies conducted by Gardner and associates. Language Learning, 53(SUPPL. 1), 167–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9922.00227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McLean, S., Kramer, B., & Beglar, D. (2015). The creation and validation of a listening vocabulary levels test. Language Teaching Research, 19(6), 741–760.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Meara, P. (2009). Connected words: Word associations and second language vocabulary acquisition (Vol. 24). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1080/09571736.2012.681513

  • Meara, P., & Rogers, V. (2019). The LLAMA tests v3 (beta versions of the LLAMA_3). Lognostics. https://www.lognostics.co.uk/tools/LLAMA_3/

  • Milton, J. (2013). Measuring the contribution of vocabulary knowledge to proficiency in the four skills. In C. Bardel, C. Lindqvist, & B. Laufer (Eds.), L2 vocabulary acquisition, knowledge and use: New perspectives on assessment and corpus analysis (Vol. 2, pp. 57–78). European Second Language Association.

  • Milton, J., & Hopkins, N. (2006). Comparing phonological and orthographic vocabulary size: Do vocabulary tests underestimate the knowledge of some learners? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 127–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mondria, J.-A., & Wiersma, B. (2004). Receptive, productive, and receptive+ productive L2 vocabulary learning: What difference does it make? In P. Bogaards & B. Laufer (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition, and testing (pp. 79–100). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Mori, Y., & Calder, T. M. (2015). The role of motivation and learner variables in L1 and L2 vocabulary development in Japanese heritage language speakers in the United States. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 730–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nam, H. (2021). Does the same learner use the same vocabulary learning strategy? Variability in strategy use. Studies in English Education, 26(2), 287–319.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nassaji, H. (2004). The relationship between depth of vocabulary knowledge and L2 learners’ lexical inferencing strategy use and success. The Canadian Modern Language Review / La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 61(1), 107–134. https://doi.org/10.1353/cml.2004.0006

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Newbury House.

  • Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P. (2005). Teaching and learning vocabulary. In E. Hinkel (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 605–620). Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review, 63(1), 59–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nation, I. S. P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9–12.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oxford, R. (1990). Styles, strategies, and aptitude: Connections for language learning. In T. S. Parry & C. W. Stansfield (Eds.), Language aptitude reconsidered.language in education: Theory and practice, No. 74 (pp. 67–125). The Center for Applied Linguistics and Prentice-Hall Inc.

  • Van Patten, B. (2006). Input processing. In B.Van Pattern & J. Williams (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (pp. 115–136). Lawrence Erlbaum.

  • Proctor, C. P., Silverman, R. D., Harring, J. R., & Montecillo, C. (2012). The role of vocabulary depth in predicting reading comprehension among English monolingual and Spanish-English bilingual children in elementary school. Reading and Writing, 25(7), 1635–1664.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Qian, D. D., & Schedl, M. (2004). Evaluation of an in-depth vocabulary knowledge measure for assessing reading performance. Language Testing, 21(1), 28–52. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532204lt273oa

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rashidi, N., & Khosravi, N. (2010). Assessing the role of depth and breadth of vocabulary knowledge in reading comprehension of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Pan-Pacific Association of Applied Linguistics, 14(1), 81–108.

    Google Scholar 

  • Read, J. (1998). Validating a test to measure depth of vocabulary knowledge. In A. J. Kunnan (Ed.), Validation in language assessment: Selected papers from the 17th language testing research colloquium, Long beach (pp. 41–60). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203053768-9

  • Read, J. (2004). Plumbing the depths: how should the construct of vocabulary be defined? In P. Bogaards & B. Laufer (Eds.), Vocabulary in a second language: Selection, acquisition and testing (pp. 209–227). https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.10.15rea

  • Read, J. (1993). The development of a new measure of L2 vocabulary knowledge. Language Testing, 10(3), 355–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229301000308

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Read, J. (2000). Assessing Vocabulary. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511732942

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, J. C. (1976). The role of vocabulary teaching. TESOL Quarterly, 10(1), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.2307/3585941

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Robinson, P. (2012). Individual differences, aptitude complexes, SLA processes, and aptitude test development. In M. Pawlak (Ed.), New perspectives on individual differences in language learning and teaching (pp. 57–75). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-20850-8_4

  • Schmitt, N. (1997). Vocabulary learning strategies. In N. Schmitt & M. McCarthy (Eds.), Vocabulary: Description, acquisition and pedagogy (pp. 199–227). Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. (2010). Researching vocabulary: A vocabulary research manual. Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N. (2014). Size and depth of vocabulary knowledge: What the research shows. Language Learning, 64(4), 913–951. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12077

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., & Schmitt, D. (1993). Identifying and assessing vocabulary learning strategies. Thai TESOL Bulletin, 5(4), 27–33.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., Schmitt, D., & Clapham, C. (2001). Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the vocabulary levels test. Language Testing, 18(1), 55–88. https://doi.org/10.1177/026553220101800103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, N., & Zimmerman, C. B. (2002). Derivative word forms: What do learners know? TESOL Quarterly, 36(2), 145–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, D., Chon, Y. V., & Kim, H. (2011). Receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of high school learners: What next for the basic word list. English Teaching, 66(3), 123–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sparks, R. L., Patton, J., Ganschow, L., & Humbach, N. (2011). Subcomponents of second-language aptitude and second-language proficiency. Modern Language Journal, 95(2), 253–273. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01176.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Staehr, L. S. (2008). Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal, 36(2), 139–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Su, X. (2019). Hanguoyu xuexizhe xuexi fengge de shizheng yanjiu[An empirical study of Korean language learners’ learning styles]. Journal of Huaihai Institute of Technology (humanities & Social Sciences Edition), 17(12), 126–130.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tight, D. G. (2010). Perceptual learning style matching and L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 60(4), 792–833. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00572.x

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tseng, W., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Toward a model of motivated vocabulary learning: A structural equation modeling approach. Language Learning, 58(2), 357–400.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2005). Receptive and productive vocabulary learning: The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(1), 33–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2008). Receptive and productive vocabulary sizes of L2 learners. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(1), 79–95.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Webb, S. (2013). Depth of vocabulary knowledge. In C. Chapelle (Ed.), Encyclopedia of applied linguistics (pp. 1656–1663). Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yamamoto, Y. (2011). Bridging the gap between receptive and productive vocabulary size throughextensive reading. The Reading Matrix, 11(3), 226–242.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, W. X., Su, D. L., & Liu, M. H. (2013). Personality traits, motivation and foreign language attainment. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 4(1), 58–66. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.4.1.58-66

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, X., & Lu, X. (2015). The relationship between vocabulary learning strategies and breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge. Modern Language Journal, 99(4), 740–753. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12277

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhang, Y., Lin, C. H., Zhang, D., & Choi, Y. (2016). 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

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, Y. (2009). Exploring Chinese EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: Implications for EFL vocabulary teaching. Journal of Asia TEFL, 6(1), 163–188.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zheng, Y. (2012). Exploring long-term productive vocabulary development in an EFL context: The role of motivation. System, 40(1), 104–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2012.01.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhong, H. F. (2016). The relationship between receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: A perspective from vocabulary use in sentence writing. The Language Learning Journal, 46(4), 357–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our special thanks of gratitude to Prof. Hal Romi at Daegu Hanny University for proofreading.

Funding

This work was supported by Dong-A University research fund.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Jiujiang University, 551 Qianjin Dong Lu, Lian Xi Qu, Jiujiang, 332005, Jiangxi, People’s Republic of China

    Ting Sun

  2. British and American Studies, Dong-A University, Bumin Campus, 225 Gudeok-ro, Seo-gu, Busan, South Korea

    Hyunjeong Nam

Authors
  1. Ting Sun
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Hyunjeong Nam
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hyunjeong Nam.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This article is based on Ting Sun’s PhD dissertation.

Appendixes

Appendixes

1. Vocabulary breadth of participants

Vocabulary Breadth

 

n

Min

Max

M

SD

Lower level

Word 2000

113

3

28

14.97

6.92

Word 3000

113

1

20

9.90

4.64

Word 5000

113

0

15

6.81

2.78

Total vocabulary size

113

10

49

31.69

12.07

Higher level

Word 2000

118

9

30

26.32

2.98

Word 3000

118

13

30

22.65

4.15

Word 5000

118

5

30

18.74

7.34

Total vocabulary size

118

50

89

67.71

11.67

2. Fit indices of confirmatory factor analysis

Model

 

χ2/df

GFI

AGFI

CFI

TLI

RMSEA

Motivation

Primitive Model

4.11

0.753

0.681

0.818

0.788

0.116

 

Revised Model

1.93

0.965

0.925

0.987

0.979

0.064

Strategy

Primitive Model

2.493

0.762

0.726

0.840

0.827

0.081

 

Revised Model

1.977

0.958

0.922

0.976

0.965

0.065

Acceptable Level

 

 < 3

 > 0.9

 > 0.9

 > 0.9

 > 0.9

 < 0.08

Source

 

Kline (2004)

Bentler (1990)

Bentler (1991)

Hu and Bentler (1999)

Hu and Bentler (2000)

Brown (1993)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sun, T., Nam, H. Variations in Vocabulary Depth Among Second Language Learners with Comparable Vocabulary Breadths: An Empirical Investigation. J Psycholinguist Res 52, 2473–2498 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-10009-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-023-10009-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation