外语教学与研究 ›› 2010, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (2): 109-116.

• 外语教育(教育部哲学社会科学学报名栏) • 上一篇    下一篇

学习任务能影响词汇附带习得吗?——“投入量假设”再探

吴旭东   

  1. 510420 广东广州市  广东外语外贸大学英文学院
  • 出版日期:2010-03-20 发布日期:2010-02-25

Can learning tasks affect incidental vocabulary acquisition?Involvement Load Hypothesis revisited

WU Xudong   

  • Online:2010-03-20 Published:2010-02-25

摘要:

为进一步检验Laufer & Hulstijn(2001)提出的"投入量假设",本研究采用"使用者行为跟踪技术"(Collentine 2000)记录了我国非英语专业大学生在完成不同"投入量"任务时的在线学习行为,并通过一项即时后测和两项延迟后测分别考察了任务类型和学习行为与词汇习得效果之间的关系。81名受试被随机分配到"投入量"不同(从0到4),但都包含9个目标词的4个学习任务中。受试完成任务过程中点击目标词的个数、每个词的点击次数、花在每个词上的时间和被重复点击的目标词同时被电脑程序记录。统计分析显示:(1)受试的在线学习行为似乎更多是受任务性质,而不是投入量大小的影响;(2)学习行为与词汇的初始学习有一定的关系,但与记忆保持无关;(3)投入量的大小对词汇的初始学习和记忆保持均不产生明显效果。假设没有得到证实。对调查结果的进一步考察发现,"投入量"这一构念的某些方面难以操作化,学习者的注意力难以通过任务来操纵是假设得不到证实的根本原因。

关键词: 投入量假设, 词汇附带习得, 学习任务, 使用者行为跟踪技术

Abstract:

To further test the Involvement Load Hypothesis proposed by Laufer & Hulstijn (2001), the present study, adopting user-behavior tracking technology (Collentine 2000), recorded the on-line learning behaviors of Chinese non-English-major students when they were performing tasks that varied in task-induced involvement load. In addition, one immediate posttest and two delayed posttests were administered to examine the respective association between the initial learning and retention of the target words on the one hand, and task type (in terms of involvement load) and on-line learning behaviors on the other. Through a computer program specially written for the present study, 81 participants were randomly assigned to 4 tasks that varied in involvement load (from 0 to 4) but all contained 9 target words to be learned. The program also recorded the target words that were clicked, the number of clicks, the time spent on the target words, and the target words that were repeatedly clicked. Statistical analyses show that (1) what affected the on-line learning behaviors of the participants was the nature of the task, rather than the task’s involvement load; (2) on-line learning behaviors were to some extent associated with the initial learning of the target words, but they were not correlated significantly with the retention; and (3) involvement load did not appear to have a significant influence on both the initial learning and retention of the target words. Thus, the Hypothesis is not verified. Further examination of the results reveals that the causes behind the failure to verify the Hypothesis are: (1) as a construct, some aspects of "involvement load" are difficult to operationalize, and (2) it is almost impossible to manipulate the learners’ attention through instructions of tasks.

中图分类号: 

  • H319