Abstract
Listening comprehension constitutes a considerable challenge for second language learners, but little is known about the relative contribution of individual differences in distinct factors to listening comprehension. Since research in this area is relatively limited in comparison to that focusing on the relationship between reading comprehension and factors such as vocabulary knowledge and working memory, there is a need for studies that seek to fill the gap in our knowledge about the specific contribution of aural vocabulary knowledge, written vocabulary knowledge and working memory capacity to explaining listening comprehension. Among 130 non-native speakers of English, the present study examines what proportion of the variance in listening comprehension is explained by aural vocabulary knowledge, written vocabulary knowledge, and working memory capacity. The results show that aural vocabulary knowledge is the strongest predictor of listening comprehension, followed by working memory capacity, while written vocabulary knowledge contributes only marginally. The study discusses implications for the explanatory power of aural vocabulary knowledge and working memory to listening comprehension and pedagogical practice in second language classrooms.
References
Alloway, T. & R. Alloway. 2013. The working memory advantage: Train your brain to function stronger, smarter, faster. New York: Simon & Schuster, Inc.10.4324/9780203094600Search in Google Scholar
Andringa, S., N. Olsthoorn, C. van Beuningen, R. Schoonen & J. Hulstijn. 2012. Determinants of success in native and non-native listening comprehension: an individual differences approach. Language Learning 62. 49–78.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2012.00706.xSearch in Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. 2003. Working memory and language: an overview. Journal of Communication Disorder 36(3). 189–208.10.1016/S0021-9924(03)00019-4Search in Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. 2010. Working memory. Current Biology 20(4). R136–R140.10.1016/j.cub.2009.12.014Search in Google Scholar
Bonk, W. 2000. Second language lexical knowledge and listening comprehension. International Journal of Listening 14. 14–31.10.1080/10904018.2000.10499033Search in Google Scholar
Buck, G. 2001. Assessing listening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511732959Search in Google Scholar
Cheng, J. & J. Matthews. 2018. The relationship between three measures of L2 vocabulary knowledge and L2 listening and reading. Language Testing 35(1). 3–25.10.1177/0265532216676851Search in Google Scholar
Conway, A. R., C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake & J. N. Towse. 2008. Variation in working memory: An introduction. In A. R. Conway, C. Jarrold, M. J. Kane, A. Miyake & J. N. Towse (eds.), Variation in working memory, 3–17. Oxford: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195168648.003.0001Search in Google Scholar
Conway, A. R., M. J. Kane, M. F. Bunting, D. Z. Hambrick, O. Wilhelm & R. W. Engle. 2005. Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 12(5). 769–786.10.3758/BF03196772Search in Google Scholar
Daneman, M. & P. A. Carpenter. 1980. Individual differences in working memory and reading. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behaviour 19. 450–466.10.1016/S0022-5371(80)90312-6Search in Google Scholar
Daneman, M. & P. M. Merikle. 1996. Working memory and language comprehension: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 3. 422–433.10.3758/BF03214546Search in Google Scholar
De Beni, R. & P. Palladino. 2000. Intrusion errors in working memory tasks: are they related to reading comprehension ability? Learning and Individual Differences 12. 131–143.10.1016/S1041-6080(01)00033-4Search in Google Scholar
Des Brisay, M. 1995. Practical considerations in the construction of program specific ESL tests: the CanTEST story. In R. Courchˆene, S. Burger, C. Cornaire, R. LeBlanc, S. Paribakht & H. S´Eguin (eds.), Twenty-five years of second language teaching at the University of Ottawa, 260–268. Ottawa, Canada: Second Language Institute.Search in Google Scholar
Field, A. 2013. Discovering statistics using IBM SPSS statistics. Los Angeles etc: Sage.Search in Google Scholar
Graham, S. 2011. Self-efficacy and academic listening. Journal of English for Academic Purposes 10. 113–117.10.1016/j.jeap.2011.04.001Search in Google Scholar
Graham, S., D. Santos & R. Vanderplank. 2008. Strategy clusters and sources of knowledge in French L2 listening comprehension. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching 4. 1–20.10.1080/17501220802385866Search in Google Scholar
Harrington, M. & M. Carey. 2009. The on-line Yes/No test as a placement tool. System 37. 614–626.10.1016/j.system.2009.09.006Search in Google Scholar
Harrington, M. & M. Sawyer. 1992. L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 14. 25–38.10.1017/S0272263100010457Search in Google Scholar
Hulstijn, J. H. 2003. Connectionist models of language processing and the training of listening skills with the aid of multimedia software. Computer Assisted Language Learning 16. 413–425.10.1076/call.16.5.413.29488Search in Google Scholar
Imhof, M. 2018. Listening span tests. In D. L. Worthington & G. D. Bodie (eds.), The sourcebook of listening research: Methodology and measures, 394–401. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.10.1002/9781119102991.ch41Search in Google Scholar
Juffs, A. & M. Harrington. 2011. Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching 44. 137–166.10.1017/S0261444810000509Search in Google Scholar
Just, M. A. & P. A. Carpenter. 1992. A capacity theory of comprehension. Psychological Review 99. 122–149.10.1037/0033-295X.99.1.122Search in Google Scholar
Kormos, J. & A. Sáfár. 2008. Phonological short-term memory, working memory and foreign language performance in intensive language learning. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 11. 261–271.10.1017/S1366728908003416Search in Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., P. Osthus, J. T. Koeth & M. F. Bunting. 2014. Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 21(4). 861–883.10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2Search in Google Scholar
Mackey, A., R. Adams, C. Stafford & P. Winke. 2010. Exploring the relationship between modified output and working memory capacity. Language Learning 60. 501–533.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00565.xSearch in Google Scholar
Masrai, A. & J. Milton. 2012. The vocabulary knowledge of university students in Saudi Arabia. TESOL Arabia Perspectives 19(3). 13–20.Search in Google Scholar
Masrai, A. & J. Milton. 2017. Recognition vocabulary knowledge and intelligence as predictors of academic achievement in EFL context. TESOL International Journal 12(1). 128–142.Search in Google Scholar
Matthews, J. & J. Cheng. 2015. Recognition of high frequency words from speech as a predictor of L2 listening comprehension. System 52. 1–13.10.1016/j.system.2015.04.015Search in Google Scholar
Matthews, J., J. Cheng & J. M. O’Toole. 2015. Computer-mediated input, output and feedback in the development of L2 word recognition from speech. ReCALL 27. 321–339.10.1017/S0958344014000421Search in Google Scholar
Matthews, J. & J. M. O’Toole. 2013. Investigating an innovative computer application to improve L2 word recognition from speech. Computer Assisted Language Learning 28. 364–382.10.1080/09588221.2013.864315Search in Google Scholar
Meara, P. & J. Milton. 2003. X_Lex, The Swansea levels test. Newbury, UK: Express.Search in Google Scholar
Mecartty, F. 2000. Lexical and grammatical knowledge in reading and listening comprehension by foreign language learners of Spanish. Applied Language Learning 11. 323–348.Search in Google Scholar
Milton, J. 2009. Measuring second language vocabulary acquisition. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847692092Search in Google Scholar
Milton, J. & N. Hopkins. 2005. Aurallex. Swansea, UK: Swansea University.Search in Google Scholar
Milton, J. & N. Hopkins. 2006. Comparing phonological and orthographic vocabulary size: Do vocabulary tests underestimate the knowledge of some learners?. Canadian Modern Language Review 63(1). 127–147.10.3138/cmlr.63.1.127Search in Google Scholar
Milton, J., J. Wade & N. Hopkins. 2010. Aural word recognition and oral competence in a foreign language. In R. Chacon-Beltran, C. Abello-Contesse & M. Torreblanca-Lopez (eds.), Further insights into non-native vocabulary teaching and learning, 83–98. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.10.21832/9781847692900-007Search in Google Scholar
Miyake, A. & N. P. Friedman. 1998. Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In A. F. Healy & L. E. Bourne (eds.), Foreign language learning: Psycholinguistic studies on training and retention, 339–364. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Mochida, k. & M. Harrington. 2006. The Yes/No test as a measure of receptive vocabulary knowledge. Language Testing 23(1). 73–98.10.1191/0265532206lt321oaSearch in Google Scholar
Murray, L. L. 2004. Cognitive treatments for aphasia: Should we and can we help attention and working memory problems?. Journal of Medical Speech-Language Pathology 12(3). xxv-xi.Search in Google Scholar
Murray, L. L., A. E. Ramage & A. Hopper. 2001. Memory impairments in adults with neurogenic communication disorders. Seminars in Speech and Language 22(2). 127–136.10.1055/s-2001-13937Search in Google Scholar
Nadig, A. 2013. Listening Comprehension. In F. R. Volkmar (ed.), Encyclopedia of autism spectrum disorders, 1743–1743. New York, NY: Springer New York.Search in Google Scholar
Nation, I. S. P. 2006. How large a vocabulary is needed for reading and listening?. Canadian Modern Language Review 63(1). 59–81.10.3138/cmlr.63.1.59Search in Google Scholar
Nouwens, S., M. A. Groen & L. Verhoeven. 2017. How working memory relates to children’s reading comprehension: the importance of domain-specificity in storage and processing. Reading and Writing 30(1). 105–120.10.1007/s11145-016-9665-5Search in Google Scholar
Payne, T. W., Z. Kalibatseva & M. K. Jungers. 2009. Does domain experience compensate for working memory capacity in second language reading comprehension?. Learning and Individual Differences 19. 119–123.10.1016/j.lindif.2008.05.003Search in Google Scholar
Read, J. 1998. Validating a test to measure depth of vocabulary knowledge. In A. Kunnan (ed.), Validation in language assessment, 41–60. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Search in Google Scholar
Read, J. 2000. Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511732942Search in Google Scholar
Rubin, J. 1994. A review of second language listening comprehension research. The Modern Language Journal 78. 199–221.10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02034.xSearch in Google Scholar
Sagarra, N. 2007. From CALL to face-to-face interaction: The effect of computer-delivered recasts and working memory on L2 development. In A. Mackey (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A series of empirical studies, 101–121. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Search in Google Scholar
Schmitt, N., D. Schmitt & C. Clapham. 2001. Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the vocabulary levels test. Language Testing 18. 55–88.10.1177/026553220101800103Search in Google Scholar
Skehan, P. 2002. Theorising and updating aptitude. In P. Robinson (ed.), Individual differences and instructed language learning, 69–95. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.2.06skeSearch in Google Scholar
Stæhr, L. S. 2008. Vocabulary size and the skills of listening, reading and writing. Language Learning Journal 36. 139–152.10.1080/09571730802389975Search in Google Scholar
Staehr, L. S. 2009. Vocabulary knowledge and advanced listening comprehension in English as a foreign language. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 31. 577–607.10.1017/S0272263109990039Search in Google Scholar
Swanson, H.L & V. Berninger. 1995. The role of working memory in skilled and less skilled reader’s comprehension. Intelligence 21. 83–108.10.1016/0160-2896(95)90040-3Search in Google Scholar
Tang, C. & J. Treffers-Daller. 2016. Assessing incidental vocabulary learning by Chinese EFL learners: Testing the involvement load hypothesis. In G. Yu & Y. Yin (eds.), Assessing Chinese learners of English: Language constructs, consequences and conundrums, 121–148. London: Palgrave.10.1057/9781137449788_7Search in Google Scholar
Van Zeeland, H. & N. Schmitt. 2013. Lexical coverage in L1 and L2 listening comprehension: The same or different from reading comprehension?. Applied Linguistics 34. 457–479.10.1093/applin/ams074Search in Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L. & S. Baker. 2015. Learner variables in second language listening comprehension: An exploratory path analysis. Language Learning 65. 390–416.10.1111/lang.12105Search in Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L., C. C. M. Goh, C. J. Mareschal & M. H. Tafaghodtari. 2006. The metacognitive awareness listening questionnaire: Development and validation. Language Learning 56. 431–462.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00373.xSearch in Google Scholar
Vandergrift, L. & M. H. Tafaghodtari. 2010. Teaching L2 learners how to listen does make a difference: An empirical study. Language Learning 60. 470–497.10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00559.xSearch in Google Scholar
Wang, Y. & J. Treffers-Daller. 2017. Explaining listening comprehension among L2 learners of English: The contribution of general language proficiency, vocabulary knowledge and metacognitive awareness. System 65. 139–150.10.1016/j.system.2016.12.013Search in Google Scholar
Wright, H. H. & G. Fergadiotis. 2012. Conceptualizing and measuring working memory and its relationship to aphasia. Aphasiology 26(3-4). 258–278.10.1080/02687038.2011.604304Search in Google Scholar
Zuo, J. 2013. A study on the effect of schemata and language proficiency on EFL listening comprehension. Overseas English 102–103 January.Search in Google Scholar
Zuo, X. 2013. The relevant research on English listening comprehension strategies and listening levels). Disciplines Exploration 50–51 July.Search in Google Scholar
© 2020 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston