The current study investigated the effects of computer-assisted L1 and L2 textual and audio glosses on vocabulary learning and reading comprehension across various learning styles. Based on the PET test, 30 homogeneous Iranian EFL learners took the VARK questionnaire and were divided into five learning style groups. Twenty-eight words were selected to be glossed in four reading passages. The selected passages, which were glossed in the four different forms of L1 and L2 audio and L1 and L2 textual by creating hyperlinks on the target words, were presented to the participants through a computer screen. All groups underwent all the treatment conditions and then took posttests.  Three-way ANOVAs were run to investigate the effects of learning styles, modes, and language, and their two-way and three-way interactions on the performance of EFL learners on the vocabulary and reading comprehension posttests. While no significant differences between language and mode of glosses on the reading comprehension posttest scores were observed, it was revealed that L1 glosses were more beneficial than L2 glosses for vocabulary learning. The study also showed that the textual glosses were more effective than audio glosses for vocabulary learning. The results further displayed significant differences between learning styles on the vocabulary learning and reading comprehension posttest scores.

中文翻译：

---

计算机辅助 L1 和 L2 文本和音频 Glosses 对不同学习方式的词汇学习和阅读理解的影响

目前的研究调查了计算机辅助的 L1 和 L2 文本和音频注释对各种学习方式的词汇学习和阅读理解的影响。基于 PET 测试，30 名同质的伊朗 EFL 学习者参加了 VARK 问卷调查，并被分为五个学习风格组。选择了 28 个单词在四个阅读段落中进行修饰。选定的段落通过在目标词上创建超链接以四种不同形式的 L1 和 L2 音频以及 L1 和 L2 文本进行修饰，并通过计算机屏幕呈现给参与者。所有组都接受了所有的治疗条件，然后进行了后测。运行三向方差分析来研究学习风格、模式和语言的影响，以及他们对英语学习者在词汇和阅读理解后测中表现的双向和三向交互作用。虽然在阅读理解后测分数上没有观察到语言和注解模式之间的显着差异，但发现 L1 注解比 L2 注解更有益于词汇学习。该研究还表明，对于词汇学习，文本注释比音频注释更有效。结果进一步显示了学习风格在词汇学习和阅读理解后测分数上的显着差异。结果表明，L1 词汇比 L2 词汇更有利于词汇学习。该研究还表明，对于词汇学习，文本注释比音频注释更有效。结果进一步显示了学习风格在词汇学习和阅读理解后测分数上的显着差异。结果表明，L1 词汇比 L2 词汇更有利于词汇学习。该研究还表明，对于词汇学习，文本注释比音频注释更有效。结果进一步显示了学习风格在词汇学习和阅读理解后测分数上的显着差异。