The Impact of Task Type and Involvement Index on Incidental vocabulary learning

Involvement Load Hypothesis (Laufer & Hulstijn, 2001) claims that learning new words during word-focused tasks isconditional upon their involvement load and that involvement index is the sole determining factor in learningvocabulary and retention. Although Laufer and Hulstijn (2001) acknowledged that all three factors may not be equallyimportant for vocabulary learning (p.21), they allocated equal involvement index for all of three components (i.e.,need, search, and evaluation). In this study, we attempted to compare the impact of different types of task with thesimilar involvement index but a different distribution of the components on vocabulary learning and subsequentretention. To this end, 45 (30 females and 15 males) EFL upper-intermediate students of an Institute were randomlyassigned to complete one of the four tasks that varied in type but were similar in the amount of involvement load. Task1: reading comprehension+ dictionary use, task 2: cloze-exercise + dictionary use, task 3: inferencing, and task 4:sentence writing+ glossed target words. Three-modality vocabulary knowledge of recognizing word form, recallingmeaning, and producing word knowledge were measured immediately after study and three weeks after the study. Theresults of the study revealed that contrary to the prediction made by the involvement load hypothesis, all four tasksprovided different amounts of vocabulary learning and retention despite their index equivalency. The study suggeststhat the depth of processing and involvement are the overriding factors in vocabulary learning and subsequent retention.In addition, it seems that operational definitions of the components of involvement in the Involvement Load Hypothesisas moderate or strong might be simplistic and need reconsideration.

Keywords:

Incidental vocabulary learning , Involvement Load Hypothesis , Need , Search , Evaluation