Encouraging learners’ semantic encoding of the target words prior to giving
the keywords may be beneficial to later retrieval. Semantic encoding of a target word can be fostered through the following two possibilities: presenting learners with an L1 translation or with vivid images that are conceptually/semantically associated with the target word.
Some researchers have explored whether learners’ performance is enhanced when they are provided with vivid illustrations. It was thought that providing vivid illustrations might make the target words more concrete and semantically transparent,
and hence reduce the effort in forming mental images. According to Campoy, Castellà, Provencio, Hitch, and Baddeley (2015), “word concreteness had an effect on memory for item identity” (Campoy et al., 2015, p. 10). In other words, the more concrete the
words to the learners, the more easily the words can be recalled.
For example, Siriganjanavong (2013) found when the keywords and the
definitions were presented along with illustrations, the keyword learners outperformed the learners taught with mixed methods. The mixed methods were contextual clues, word structure analysis, and opposite word-pairs. The keyword learners statistically outperformed on both immediate and two-week delayed tests. Also, McGivern and Levin (1983) found the keyword learners provided with keywords and illustrations
- 28 -
performed statistically better than those who simply received keywords or the introduction of the method. The advantage of providing pictures was also found by
Levin et al. (1984), who reported that vivid pictures facilitated both beginners and high flyers’ vocabulary learning. Furthermore, Shapiro and Waters (2005) found the
imagery level of the target words has a significant effect on both immediate and delayed retrieval.
Based on the assumption that vivid images may lead to better immediate and
later performance, Dolean (2014) conducted a study to explore if presenting pictures related to keywords may facilitate learners’ performance on definition recall. Note
that the pictures related to the keywords have no interaction with the definitions of the target words. The participants were middle school students, who were divided into three groups: keyword, picture, and word. The vocabulary was read aloud by the teacher. The keyword participants were presented with two pictures, one related to the target word and the other to the keyword. Two pictures were simultaneously
presented on the same PPT slide; the picture for the definition was bigger than that for the keyword. For the picture group, only pictures related to the definitions of the target words were presented. For the word group, only an L1 translation was shown on the slide. The results indicated that the keyword learners outperformed the other groups. The better performance remained on immediate, one-week delayed, and even
- 29 -
one-month delayed tests; the participants were not informed about the delayed tests in advance.
The maintenance of the learning outcome of the keyword method over time may be attributed to how the keyword was presented in this study. According to Jarrold and Citroën (2013), when acoustically similar words were presented with pictures, the phonological similarity effect could be effectively inhibited. In other words, when the target word and the keyword were presented with pictures rather than verbal codes, the phonological similarity effect was prevented, so learners directly accepted the semantic knowledge of the target word through the picture without the hindrance of the phonological similarity effect. The semantic encoding of the to-be-learned target words effectively helped learners’ later retrieval.
Though it would appear that providing pictures related to keywords is more powerful than simply providing the L1 translations (Dolean, 2014, Experiment 2), this may be because the participants in the translation group were not instructed about the keyword method. More research should be done to explore if word participants would perform better with instruction in the keyword method.
While some researchers agreed that pictures would facilitate vocabulary learning (Dolean, 2014; Levin et al., 1984; McGivern & Levin, 1983; Peters & Levin, 1986), others, such as Wang and Thomas (1992), observed faster forgetting rates for
- 30 -
learners provided with vivid images. The participants who accepted word visual stimuli performed better in recognizing Chinese characters than those who accepted picture stimuli. They attributed the result to encoding variability, assuming that “the mnemonic description accompanying each ideograph may differ from the
spontaneous, pre-experimental encoding of individual subjects” (Wang & Thomas, 1992, p. 373). Hence, they speculated that only when the mental images were formed by learners could the effectiveness persist over time. In other words, to maintain the immediate learning outcome, encouraging learners to form mental images rather than providing vivid illustrations might be more beneficial to later retrieval.
Considering provided pictures may cause interference, Wang and Thomas (1992) suggested that learners should be encouraged to form their own mental images regarding the word forms, which was confirmed in Campos et al.’s (2003) study. The keyword learners presented with pictures performed significantly worse than the rote learners (Campos et al., 2003, Experiment 3). The researchers conjectured that the reason might be that “drawings do not induce a direct association between the second-language word and the first-language word” (Campos et al., 2003, p. 408).
When learners accept pictures as visual stimuli, it might be challenging for them to translate the target words into an L1 definition via the recall of images. Learners may need to transfer the nonverbal code (picture) into verbal code (L1 translation) during
- 31 -
retrieval to complete the word definition test. Hence, directly providing L1 translation as visual stimuli might be more effective than providing pictures related to definition.
Providing L1 translation as visual stimuli for EFL learners is theoretically motivated by Dufour and Kroll’s (1995) revised hierarchical model, which indicates
that the lexical link from L2 to L1 is stronger than L2 to the conceptual link. The
stronger the link, the more easily the information can be connected and retrieved. For instance, when learners see the target word “fire,” recalling its L1 translation might be
easier than the presented image of fire. Because the link from L2 to L1 is stronger, learners can recall the L1 translation (form) more easily than the image (semantic).
Dufour and Kroll (1995) suggested that beginning EFL learners tend to initially connect the L2 target word to its L1 translation. If the target word is presented with its L1 translation, learners may immediately realize the form-meaning knowledge of the target word. When they need to make the semantic association of the target word, its
L1 translation may be easily retrieved due to the stronger link from L2 to L1.
Based on the revised hierarchical model, EFL learners’ conceptual link to L2
is weaker than the lexical link from L2 to L1. Luna and Peracchio (1999) further explained that the conceptual link to L2 is weak because learners needed to achieve “a high level of proficiency in their second language so that they rely less on their L1 to gain access to meaning” (Luna & Peracchio, 1999, p. 307). When the definition of the
- 32 -
target word is presented with pictures, learners accept the concept of the target word.
Beginning EFL learners may find it difficult to link the concept to the L2 verbal code because of the weaker link. For instance, if the target word “fire” is only presented
with a picture, learners may find it hard to connect the image of fire to the L2 verbal
code during retrieval. However, they may connect the image of fire to concepts like
“hot,” “dangerous,” or “do not touch” based on their prior knowledge. The connection
formed by the participants is not directly related to the L1 definition of the target word and being irrelevant may hinder learners’ retrieval. The hindrance of pictures was observed during later retrieval (Wang & Thomas, 1992), and during both immediate and delayed retrieval (Campos et al., 2003).
Though some studies claimed that pictures may become a hindrance, other studies suggested providing vivid pictures to the learners helped them retain the learned information over time (Ashouri & Moghadam, 2015; Dolean, 2014,
Experiments 1 & 2; Levin et al., 1984; McGivern & Levin, 1983; Rummel, Levin, &
Woodward, 2003; Siriganjanavong, 2013). Hence, which learning or encoding cue (word or picture) helps facilitate vocabulary learning remains an unresolved issue.
Given the results of the aforementioned studies, the goals of the present experiment were twofold. First, the study described in this thesis aims to examine whether adjusting the teaching sequence of the keyword method—which may
- 33 -
eliminate the phonological similarity effect—helps learners retain their vocabulary gains over time. Second, this study explores whether providing a word prime or picture prime leads to different effects on the (vocabulary) learning outcomes.