Context Facilitates the Decoding of Lexically Ambiguous Words for Adult Literacy Learners.

An estimated one-fifth of adults in the United States possess low literacy skills, which includes minimal proficiency in reading and difficulty processing contextual information. One way to study reading behavior of adults with low literacy is through eye movement studies; however, these investigations have been generally limited. Thus, the present study collected eye movement data (e.g., gaze duration, total time, regressions) from adult literacy learners while they read sentences to investigate online reading behavior. We manipulated the lexical ambiguity of the target words, context strength, and context location in the sentences. The role of vocabulary depth, which refers to the deeper understanding of a word in one's vocabulary, was also examined. Results show that adult literacy learners spent more total time reading ambiguous words compared to control words and vocabulary depth was significantly correlated with processing of lexically ambiguous words. Participants with higher depth scores were more sensitive to the complexity of ambiguous words and more effective at utilizing context compared to those with lower depth scores, which is reflected by more total time reading ambiguous words when more informative context was available and more regressions made to the target word by participants with higher depth scores. Overall, there is evidence to demonstrate the benefits of context use in lexical processing, as well as adult learners' sensitivity to changes in lexical ambiguity.

It's in the Way That You Use It: How Vocabulary Knowledge and Usage Predict Writing Quality Among Adult Basic Education Learners.

The goal of this study was to describe how underlying vocabulary knowledge manifests into vocabulary usage, and in turn, how usage predicts writing quality among adult basic education (ABE) learners. ABE learners were administered tasks that measured vocabulary knowledge, in the forms of both vocabulary breadth and depth. Participants were also given a composition writing task, and these samples were evaluated for overall writing quality and vocabulary usage. A mediating model was constructed to describe the relationships among variables. This model indicates that vocabulary depth is predictive of writing quality through the mediating variable of vocabulary usage after controlling for the direct contribution of vocabulary breadth. We found no evidence that vocabulary breadth contributes to writing quality when controlling for vocabulary depth and vocabulary usage. The results of the study reveal important relationships among vocabulary knowledge and vocabulary usage in written work that warrants further investigation in developing learners.

Before, During, and After: An Examination of the Pre-Task Planning and Post-Task Revising Practices of Adults with Low Literacy and their Effect on the Quality of Written Compositions.

This study sought to examine the pre-task planning and post-task revising practices of adults with low literacy and how those practices affect overall writing quality. Seventy-six adults with low literacy composed essays in response to a prompt and were given time for pre-task planning and post-task revising. Results showed that participants with higher planning skills were able to utilize planning and revising processes to increase the detail included in their compositions while potentially streamlining the language contained therein. Writers with lower planning skills, in contrast, focused on lower-level aspects of writing (e.g., word choice) and were unable to make use of the more demanding processes of planning and revising to improve their compositions. These findings suggest a hierarchical development of writing skills and the possibility of sacrifices in certain areas of the writing process as writers focus on other areas. Practical implications for practitioners are discussed.

The Factor Structure of Vocabulary: An Investigation of Breadth and Depth of Adults with Low Literacy Skills.

The purpose of this study was to examine the factor structure of vocabulary. We believe that not only is vocabulary multidimensional, but depth of vocabulary knowledge should also be assessed with multiple measures since it too, is composed of multiple aspects. Furthermore, to explore the predictive validity of the different aspects of vocabulary knowledge, we assessed the relationship between vocabulary breadth, vocabulary depth, and reading comprehension in adults with low literacy skills. The participants were 103 adults. They completed 12 tasks that have been used in past studies to measure vocabulary breadth, depth, and reading comprehension. We had several important findings. First, we confirmed that all of the assessments were highly reliable for adults with low literacy skills. Second, the results of the factor analysis indicated two distinct vocabulary factors. Finally, both breadth and depth contribute independently to explaining variance in reading comprehension. Implications for vocabulary measurement are suggested.

Vocabulary accessibility and acquisition: do you get more from a financestor or a sociophite?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the current study was to examine how the morphological structure of a real word or novel word affected the incidental vocabulary learning of participants and to examine how these target items are processed as they are read. In addition, we examined the roles of vocabulary depth and breadth in the process of incidental vocabulary learning. METHODS: We had participants read short passages that contained real words or novel words that differed on their morphological accessibility as we collected eye movement data. Participants also completed several vocabulary depth and breadth measures. RESULTS: Accessible real words and novel words were learned better than inaccessible and less accessible items, but there was a processing cost associated with accessible real words compared with inaccessible real words. In contrast, participants spent more time on the less accessible novel words compared with accessible novel words, but that extra processing time did not translate into better acquisition scores. Finally, both vocabulary breadth and depth explained variance in incidental vocabulary acquisition, while breadth explained variance in gaze duration and depth explained variance in regressive eye movements. CONCLUSIONS: Accessibility of the targets affected both acquisition and reading time, and depth and breadth are both individual differences that explain variance in incidental acquisition and the processing of those words.