The Effects of Input Modality, Word Difficulty and Reading Experience on Word Recognition Accuracy

Language users encounter words in at least two different modalities. Arguably, the most frequent encounters are in spoken or written form. Previous research has shown that – compared to the spoken modality – written language features more difficult words. An important question is whether input modality has effects on word recognition accuracy. In the present study, we investigated whether input modality (spoken, written, or bimodal) affected word recognition accuracy and whether such a modality effect interacted with word difficulty. Moreover, we tested whether the participants’ reading experience interacted with word difficulty and whether this interaction was influenced by modality. We re-analyzed data from 48 Dutch university students that were collected in the context of a vocabulary test development to assess in which modality test words should be presented. Participants carried out a word recognition task, where non-words and words of varying difficulty were presented in auditory, visual and audio-visual modalities. In addition, they completed a receptive vocabulary and an author recognition test to measure their exposure to literary texts. Our re-analyses showed that word difficulty interacted with reading experience in that frequent readers (i.e., with more exposure to written texts) were more accurate in recognizing difficult words than individuals who read less frequently. However, there was no evidence for an effect of input modality on word recognition accuracy, nor for interactions with word difficulty or reading experience. Thus, in our study, input modality did not influence word recognition accuracy. We discuss the implications of this finding and describe possibilities for future research involving other groups of participants and/or different languages.

The effects of input modality, word difficulty and reading experience on word recognition accuracy

Language users encounter words in at least two different modalities. Arguably, the most frequent encounters are in spoken or written form. Previous research has shown that – compared to the spoken modality – written language features more difficult words. Thus, frequent reading might have effects on word recognition. In the present study, we investigated 1) whether input modality (spoken, written, or bimodal) has an effect on word recognition accuracy, 2) whether this modality effect interacts with word difficulty, 3) whether the interaction of word difficulty and reading experience impacts word recognition accuracy, and 4) whether this interaction is influenced by input modality. To do so, we re-analysed a dataset that was collected in the context of a vocabulary test development to assess in which modality test words should be presented. Participants had carried out a word recognition task, where non-words and words of varying difficulty were presented in auditory, visual and audio-visual modalities. In addition to this main experiment, participants had completed a receptive vocabulary and an author recognition test to measure their reading experience. Our re-analyses did not reveal evidence for an effect of input modality on word recognition accuracy, nor for interactions with word difficulty or language experience. Word difficulty interacted with reading experience in that frequent readers were more accurate in recognizing difficult words than individuals who read less frequently. Practical implications are discussed.

Evaluating Corpora with Word Lists and Word Difficulty

This study examines the application of an IRT analysis of words on lists including the General Service List (GSL), New General Service List (NGSL), Academic Word List (AWL), New Academic Word List (NAWL), and TOEIC Service List (TSL). By comparing line graphs, density distribution graphs, and boxplots for the average difficulty of each word list to related lists, we can get a visualization of the data’s distribution. Japanese EFL students responded to one or more of 84 Yes/No test forms compiled from 5,880 unique real words and 2,520 nonwords. The real words were analyzed using Winsteps (Linacre, 2005) resulting in IRT estimates for each word. By summing the difficulties of each word, we can calculate the average difficulty of each word list which can then be used to rank the lists. In effect, the process supports the concurrent validity of the lists. The analysis indicates the word family approach results in more difficult word lists. The mean difficulties of the GSL and the BNC_COCA appear to be more divergent and more difficult particularly over the first 4000 words, possibly due to the use of Bauer and Nation’s (1993) Affix Level 6 definition for their compilation. Finally, just as we should expect word lists for beginners to have higher frequency words than subsequent lists, we should also expect them to be easier with more words known to learners. This can be seen with the gradual but marked difference between the different word lists of the NGSL and its supplemental SPs.