Maryam Ehsani - Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Hossein Karami - Faculty of Foreign Languages and Literatures, University of Tehran, Tehran, Iran
Omid Mallahi - Department of English Language Teaching, University of Hormozgan, Bandar Abbass, Iran

This study aimed to investigate the effect of task type (i.e., sentence fill-in/sentence writing) and word type (i.e., real/ pseudo) on initial learning and retention of ۱۰ word meanings, taking the predictions of Involvement Load Hypothesis (ILH) and Technique Feature Analysis (TFA) into account. Participants were ۵۹ intermediate-level EFL learners from eight intact classes. Each intact class was randomly assigned to one of the four learning conditions: ۱) sentence fill-in with real words, ۲) sentence writing with real words, ۳) sentence fill-in with pseudowords, and ۴) sentence writing with pseudowords. Initial learning was measured by administering a meaning recall test immediately after the tasks and medium-term retention was measured by administering the same test with rearranged items one week after the tasks phase. The results of a mixed between-within subjects ANOVA did not show any significant interaction effect between test time and learning condition. Furthermore, the main effect for learning condition was not statistically significant but there was a significant main effect for test time, suggesting that participants’ scores dropped significantly from the immediate posttest to the delayed posttest. The findings of two independent-samples t-tests failed to show any significant difference between the immediate and delayed posttest scores of the participants who received either sentence fill-in or sentence writing tasks. However, some tentative findings demonstrated that those participants who were assigned to the sentence writing task achieved higher scores on the posttests. This finding indicates that TFA has probably more predictive power than ILH and it also provides some evidence in favor of the heavier weight of the evaluation component of the ILH when compared to its search component.

Involvement Load Hypothesis, Technique Feature Analysis, L۲ vocabulary learning, vocabulary learning task