國立臺灣師範大學博碩士論文全文系統

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

回結果列表

研究生：	吳盈潔 Wu,Ying-chieh
論文名稱：	多媒體單字註釋對於字彙學習、聽力以及閱讀理解的效果 The Effects of Different Presentation Modes of Multimedia Annotations on Vocabulary Learning and Listening and Reading Comprehension
指導教授：	林至誠 Lin, Chih-cheng
學位類別：	碩士 Master
系所名稱：	英語學系 Department of English
論文出版年：	2013
畢業學年度：	101
語文別：	英文
論文頁數：	133
中文關鍵詞：	多媒體註釋、單字學習、聽力理解、閱讀理解、學習風格偏好、認知負荷
英文關鍵詞：	multimedia annotation, vocabulary learning, listening comprehension, reading comprehension, learning style preference, cognitive load
論文種類：	學術論文
相關次數：	點閱：250 下載：0
分享至:	分享至facebook 分享至twitter

查詢本校圖書館目錄查詢臺灣博碩士論文知識加值系統勘誤回報

上一筆

許多研究已經指出多媒體註釋對於增進單字學習的效益。在這些多媒體註釋中，單字解釋通常都輔以圖片或是影片來呈現，而聲音媒介往往未被提供。再者，雖然認知負荷常被用來解釋多媒體註釋的效果，但是卻少有研究提供確切的認知負荷量來佐證。因此，本研究旨在探討呈現文字、圖片、聲音媒介的多媒體單字註釋對於學習者在單字學習，聽力以及閱讀理解表現的效果。而多媒體註釋的效益是否受學習者的學習風格偏好影響也將被探究。本研究另外亦探討不同模式的單字註釋是否將造成不同程度的認知負荷。
受試者為423位國中生，在活動中，他們將閱讀一篇提供了單字註釋的英語文章。他們首先被區分為具有語文視覺，非語文視覺，以及聽覺風格偏好的學習者，接著他們被隨機分配到任一單字註釋的組別，包括純文字，文字加圖片，文字加聲音，文字加圖片及聲音(混合)組。之後，他們接受三份單字測驗以及兩份理解測驗，最後，他們依序完成一份認知負荷問卷以及一份多媒體註釋使用態度調查問卷。
根據二因子變異數分析的結果，單字註釋類型和學習者的學習風格偏好並無顯著交互作用。並且，單字註釋類型並未顯著地影響學習者在學習和記憶單字拼字，單字解釋，以及閱讀理解的表現。然而，單字註釋類型對於學習者在聽字辨意以及句子聽力理解的表現有顯著的影響。其中，混和組在聽字辨意測驗中的表現顯著優於純文字組以及文字加圖片組，而混合組還有文字加聲音組在句子聽力理解的表現顯著優於純文字組。至於測得的認知負荷量，二因子變異數分析的結果顯示單字註釋類型和學習者的學習風格偏好並無顯著交互作用，並且，閱讀不同類型單字註釋的學習者所承受的認知負荷量並未顯著不同。最後，使用態度調查表的結果指出，學習者對於使用多媒體註釋的容易度，其增進單字學習及記憶的效益，多媒體註釋的提供及使用，以及在未來使用的意願上都抱持正面的態度。根據本研究的發現，文末提供有關多媒體註釋的應用和設計之建議，以及對於未來研究的建議。

Many studies have reported the effectiveness of multimedia annotations presented in dual modes in facilitating vocabulary acquisition. Translations were commonly supplied with pictures and videos in the annotations. Sound, however, as alternative input is absent. Moreover, the effects of multimedia annotations tended to be conceptually discussed with the notion of cognitive loads without concrete evidence. Therefore, the present study aims to explore the effects of varied multimedia annotations incorporating textual, pictorial, and audio input on vocabulary learning, listening, and reading comprehension. It also examines if learners’ learning style preference affects the effectiveness of multimedia annotations. In addition, this study investigates if learners experience different cognitive loads.
A total of 423 junior high school students were recruited to read an annotated passage. They were classified under visual/verbal, visual/nonverbal, and auditory preference first and then were randomly assigned to an annotation group, namely, text-only, text-plus-picture, text-plus-sound, text-plus-picture-and-sound groups. After the treatment, the learners took three word tests and two comprehension tests. They also completed two questionnaires for the measurement of imposed cognitive loads and investigation of attitudes toward the use of multimedia annotations.
The results of two-way ANOVA showed that there was no significant interaction effect between annotation type and learning style preference. Moreover, annotation type did not significantly enhance learning and retention of word spelling as well as word meaning and performance on reading comprehension. Yet, there was a significant effect of annotation type on performances on the definition-supply and sentential listening comprehension tests. The Combined Group significantly outperformed the Text Group and the Picture Group in the definition-supply tests. Moreover, the Combined Group and the Sound Group were superior to the Text Group in the sentential listening comprehension tests. With respect to cognitive loads, results of two-way ANOVA revealed that there was no interaction effect of annotation type and learning style preference. Also, no significant effect of annotation type on the imposed cognitive loads was reported. Finally, the results of the questionnaire revealed that many of the learners held positive attitudes toward the ease of using multimedia annotation, the effectiveness of it in facilitating vocabulary learning and retention, the availability of this technique, and their intention to use it in the future. Some pedagogical suggestions on the provision and designs of multimedia annotations and suggestions for future research are presented at the end of the study.

中文摘要..................................................i
ABSTRACT................................................ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS.......................................iii
TABLE OF CONTENTS.......................................iv
LIST OF TABLES.........................................vii
LIST OF FIGURES.......................................viii

CHAPTER ONE  INTRODUCTION................................1
1 Background and Motivation............................1
2 Research Questions...................................6
3 Significance of the Present Study....................7
CHAPTER TWO  LITERATURE REVIEW...........................9
1 Annotations as Vocabulary Learning Enhancement.......9
1.1 Traditional and Computerized Glosses...............9
1.2 The Value of Multimedia Annotations...............10
2 Multimedia Learning in Second Language Acquisition..11
2.1 Theoretical Framework Supporting Multimedia Learning................................................11
2.2 Effect of Multimedia Annotations on Vocabulary Learning in Reading Tasks— Incorporating Graphics.......14
2.3 Effect of Multimedia Annotations on Vocabulary Learning in Reading Tasks—Incorporating Video...........18
2.4 Effect of Multimedia Annotations on Vocabulary Learning in Reading Tasks—Sound as an Alternative Input    22
2.5 Effect of Multimedia Annotations on Reading Comprehension in Reading Tasks...........................24
2.6 Effect of Multimedia Annotations in Listening Comprehension Tasks......................................27
2.7 Individual Difference Moderating the Effect of Multimedia Vocabulary Learning...........................28
3 Cognitive Load Theory................................31
3.1 Cognitive Load Construct and Distinction...........32
3.2 Approach to Measuring Cognitive Load...............35
3.3 Design Principles in Multimedia Learning Environments Derived from Cognitive Load Theory.......................38
3.4 Empirical Studies on Cognitive Load in Multimedia Language Learning........................................41
4 The Present Study....................................45
CHAPTER THREE  METHODS...................................48
1 Participants.........................................48
2 Materials............................................48
2.1 Reading Text.......................................48
2.2 Target Words.......................................49
3 Annotations..........................................50
4 Instruments..........................................50
4.1 Vocabulary Prior Knowledge Test....................50
4.2 Survey of Perceptual English Learning Style........51
4.3 Immediate and Delayed Definition-supply Test.......52
4.4 Immediate and Delayed Vocabulary Production Test...52
4.5 Immediate and Delayed Vocabulary Recognition Test..53
4.6 Immediate and Delayed Listening Comprehension Test.53
4.7 Reading Comprehension Test.........................53
4.8 Subjective Cognitive Load Survey...................53
4.9 Questionnaire......................................55
5 Procedure............................................55
6 Data Analysis........................................57
6.1 Scoring............................................57
6.2 Statistical Analysis...............................58
CHAPTER FOUR  RESULTS....................................59
1 Results of Vocabulary Prior Knowledge Pretest........59
2 Vocabulary Posttest Results—Definition-supply Test..59
3 Vocabulary Posttest Results— Production Test.........64
4 Vocabulary Posttest Results— Recognition Test........67
5 Sentential Listening Comprehension Test..............70
6 Reading Comprehension Test...........................73
7 Estimated Cognitive Load.............................75
8 Questionnaire........................................77
CHAPTER FIVE  DISCUSSION.................................83
1 Effects of Varied Multimedia Annotations on Word Gain and Retention............................................83
1.1 Summary of the Results of the Three Vocabulary Posttests................................................83
1.2 Effects of Multimedia Annotations on Enhancing Performance on Definition-supply Tests...................85
1.3 Effects of Multimedia Annotations on Enhancing Performance on Production and Recognition Tests..........89
2 Effects of Multimedia Annotations on Listening and Reading Comprehension....................................92
2.1 Summary of the Results of the Listening and Reading Comprehension Tests......................................92
2.2 Effects of Multimedia Annotations on Comprehension.93
3 Interaction between Annotation Type and Learning Style Preference...............................................97
3.1 Summary Results of the Interaction Effect between Annotation Type and Learning Style Preference............97
3.2 Interaction between Annotation Type and Learning Style Preference.........................................97
4 Induced Cognitive Load of different types of annotations.............................................100
4.1 Summary Results of Cognitive Load Induced Experienced by the Four Annotation Groups...........................100
4.2 Induced Cognitive Load by Different Types of Multimedia Annotations..................................100
5 Summary of Questionnaire Results and Discussion on Learners’ Opinions......................................103
6 Summary of Chapter Five.............................105
CHAPTER SIX  CONCLUSION.................................107
1 Summary of Major Findings...........................107
2 Pedagogical Implications............................109
3 Limitations of the Present Study and Suggestions for Future Research.........................................111
REFERENCES..............................................113
APPENDICES..............................................120
Appendix 1: Reading Text................................120
Appendix 2: Reading Comprehension Questions.............121
Appendix 3: Production and Recognition Word Tests.......122
Appendix 4: Vocabulary Prior Knowledge Test.............124
Appendix 5: Survey on Learning Style Preference (Chinese version)................................................126
Appendix 6: Survey on Learning Style Preference (English version)................................................128
Appendix 7: Survey on Cognitive Load (Chinese version)..130
Appendix 8: Survey on Cognitive Load (English version)..131
Appendix 9: Questionnaire of Attitudes toward the Use of Multimedia Annotations (Chinese version)................132
Appendix 10: Questionnaire of Attitudes toward the Use of Multimedia Annotations (English version)................133

                                

Abidin, M. J. Z., Majid, P. M., Shoar, N. S., Cheong, S. T. H, & Jafre, A. M. (2011). A comparative study of using multimedia annotation and printed textual glossary in learning vocabulary. International Journal of Learning and Development, 1(1), 82-90.
Acha, J. (2009). The effectiveness of multimedia programmes in children’s vocabulary learning. British Journal of Educational Technology, 40(1), 23-31.
Akbulut, Y. (2007). Effects of multimedia annotations on incidental vocabulary learning and reading comprehension of advanced learners of English as a foreign language. Instruction Science, 35, 499-517.
Al-Seghayer, K. (2001). The effect of multimedia annotation modes on L2 vocabulary acquisition: A comparative study. Language Learning & Technology, 5(1), 202-232.
Ariew, R. & Ercetin, G. (2004). Exploring the potential of hypermedia annotations for second language reading. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 17(2), 237-259.
Ayres, P. & Sweller, J. (2005). The split-attention principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp.135-146). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Baddeley, A. (1992). Working memory. Science, 255, 556-559.
Baggett, P. (1989). Understanding visual and verbal messages. In H. Mandl & J. Levin (Eds.), Knowledge acquisition from text and pictures (pp. 101-124). Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52(2), 323-363.
Bascome, E. G. (2004). Effects of learning-styles instructional resources on short- and long-term vocabulary retention and attitudes of seventh-grade language arts students. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, St. John’s University, Queens, NY.
Bowels, M. A. (2004). L2 glossing: To CALL or not to CALL. Hispania, 87(3), 541-552.
Brett, P. (1995). Multimedia for listening comprehension: The design of a multimedia-based resource for developing listening skills. System, 23(1), 77-85.
Brown, H. D. (2007). Principles of language learning and teaching. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Brünken, R., Plass, J., & Leutner, D. (2003). Direct measurement of cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 53-61.
Brünken, R., Seufert, T, & Paas, F. (2010). Measuring cognitive load. In Plass, J., Moreno, R., & Brünken, R. (Eds.), Cognitive load theory (pp. 181-202). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Chang, C. C., Lei, H., & Tseng, J. S. (2011). Media presentation mode, English listening comprehension and cognitive load in ubiquitous learning environments: Modality effect or redundancy effect? Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 27(4), 633-654.
Chang, C. C., Tseng, K. H., & Tseng, J. S. (2011). Is single or dual channel with different English proficiencies better for English listening comprehension, cognitive load and attitude in ubiquitous learning environment? Computer & Education, 57, 2313-2321.
Chapelle, C. (1998). Multimedia call: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning and Technology, 2(1), 22-34.
Chen, I. J. & Chang, C. C. (2011). Content presentation modes in mobile language listening tasks: English proficiency as a moderator. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(5), 451-470.
Chen, N. S., Hsieh, S. W., Kinshuk. (2008). Effects of short-term memory and content representation type on mobile language learning. Language Learning and Technology, 12(30), 93-113.
Chun, D. M. & Plass, J. L. (1997). Research on text comprehension in multimedia environments. Language Learning & Technology, 1(1), 60-81.
Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996a). Effect of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 183-198.
Chun, D. M., & Plass, J. L. (1996b). Facilitating reading comprehension with multimedia. System, 24(4), 503-519.
Corbett, S. S. & Smith, W. F. (1984). Identifying student learning styles: Proceed with caution! The Modern Language Journal, 68(3), 212-221.
Craik, F. I. M. & Lockhart, R. S. (1972). Levels of processing: A framework for memory research. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 11, 671-684.
Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and use acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13, 319-340.
de Bot, K. (1996). The psycholinguistics of the output hypothesis. Language Learning, 46, 529-555.
De Groot, A. (1965). Thought and choice in chess. The Hague, Netherlands: Mouton.
Debuse, J. C. W., Hede, A. & Lawley, M. (2009). Learning efficacy of simultaneous audio and on-screen text in online lectures. Australasian Journal of Education Technology, 25(5), 748-762.
Diao, Y & Sweller, J. (2007). Redundancy in foreign language reading comprehension instruction: Concurrent written and spoken presentations. Learning and Instruction, 17, 78-88.
Diao, Y., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2007). The effect of written text on comprehension of spoken English as a foreign language. The American Journal of Psychology, 120(2), 237-261.
Grace, C. (1998). Retention of word meanings inferred from context and sentence-level translations: Implications for the design of beginning-level CALL software. Modern Language Journal, 82(4), 533-544.
Harley, H. (2006). English words: A linguistic introduction. Cambridge, MA: Blackwell.
Hunt, A., & Beglar, D. (2002). Current research and practice in teaching vocabulary. In J. C. Richards & W. A. Renandya (Eds.), Methodology in language teaching: An anthology of current practice (pp.258-266). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Jones L. C., & Plass, J. L. (2002). Supporting listening comprehension and vocabulary acquisition in French with multimedia annotations. The Modern Language Journal, 86(4), 546-561.
Jones, L. (2004). Testing L2 vocabulary recognition and recall using pictorial and written test items. Language Learning & Technology, 8(3), 122-143.
Kalyuga, S., Chandler, P., & Sweller, J. (2000). Incorporating learner experience into the design of multimedia instruction. Journal of Educational Psychology, 92(1), 126-136.
Kinsella, K. (1993). Perceptual Learning Preferences Survey. In J. M. Reid (Ed.) Learning Styles in the ESL/EFL Classroom (pp.221-224). Boston: Heinle & Heinle Publishers.
Ko, M. H. (2012). Glossing and second language vocabulary learning. TESOL Quarterly, 46(1), 56-79.
Ko, Y. W. (2002). Perceptual style preferences and their relationship to English achievement and learning strategies of junior high EFL learners in Taiwan. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Kaohsiung Normal University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Kost, C. R., Foss, P., & Lenzini, J. J. (1999). Textual and pictorial glosses: Effectiveness on incidental vocabulary growth when reading in a foreign language. Foreign Language Annals, 32(1), 89-113.
Krashen, S. (1989). We acquire vocabulary and spelling by reading: Additional evidence for the input hypothesis. Modern Language Journal, 73, 445-464.
Kuo, F. L. & Chiang, H. K. (2006). Story animation: Helping students build connections between words and pictures in multimedia learning. Proceedings of 2006 International Conference on English Instruction and Assessment. Retrieved from http://fllcccu.ccu.edu.tw/conference/2005conference_2/download/C16.pdf
Laufer, B. & Hulstijn, J. (2001). Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics, 22(1), 1-26.
Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(4), 565-585.
Lin, C. C. & Tseng, Y. F. (2012). Videos and animations for vocabulary learning: A study on difficult words. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, 11(4), 346-355.
Lin, C. C. (2009). Learning action verbs with animation. The JALT CALL Journal, 5(3), 23-40.
Lin, L. F. (2010). A video-based CALL program for proficient and less-proficient L2 learners’ comprehension ability, incidental vocabulary acquisition. Educational Media International, 47(3), 199-216.
Lomicka, L. (1998). “To gloss or not to gloss”: An investigation of reading comprehension online. Language Learning & Technology, 1(2), 41-50.
Low, R & Swellwe, J. (2005). The modality principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp.147-158). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Lynch, T. (1998). Theoretical perspectives on listening. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 18, 3-19.
Marzban, A. (2011). Investigating the role of multimedia annotations in EFL reading comprehension. Social and Behavioral Sciences, 28, 72-77.
Mayer, R. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (1998). A split-attention effect in multimedia learning: Evidence for dual processing systems in working memory. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 312-320.
Mayer, R. E. & Moreno, R. (2003). Nine ways to reduce cognitive load in multimedia learning. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 43-52.
Mayer, R. E. (1997). Multimedia learning: Are we asking the right questions? Educational Psychologist, 32(1), 1-19.
Mayer, R. E. (2001). Multimedia learning. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Mayer, R. E. (2005). Cognitive theory of multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 31-48). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Moreno, R. & Mayer, R. (1999). Cognitive principles of multimedia design: the role of modality and contiguity. Journal of Educational Psychology, 91(2), 358-368.
Moreno, R. & Mayer, R. E. (2002). Verbal redundancy in multimedia learning: When reading helps listening. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(1), 156-163.
Nagata, N. (1999). The effectiveness of computer-assisted interactive glosses. Foreign Language Annals, 32(4), 469-479.
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Paas, F. & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1993). The efficiency of instructional conditions: An approach to combine mental effort and performance measures. Human Factors, 35, 737-743.
Paas, F. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skill in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429-434.
Paas, F. G. W. C. & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (1994). Instructional control of cognitive load in the training of complex cognitive tasks. Educational Psychology Review, 6(4), 351-371.
Paas, F. G. W. C. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer of problem-solving skills in statistics: A cognitive-load approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 429-434.
Paas, F. Renkl, A. & Sweller J. (2003). Cognitive load theory and instructional design: Recent developments. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 1-4.
Pass, F., Tuovinen, J. E., Tabbers, H., & van Gerven, P. W. M. (2003). Cognitive load measurement as a means to advance cognitive load theory. Educational Psychologist, 38(1), 63-71.
Pavio, A. (1986). Mental representation: A dual-coding approach. New York: Oxford University Press.
Pimsleur, P., Hancock, C., & Furey, P. (1977). Speech rate and listening comprehension. In M. Burt, H. Dulary, & M. Finocchiaro (Eds.), Viewpoints on English as a second language (pp. 76–89). New York: Regents.
Plass, J. L. & Jones, L. C. (2005). Multimedia learning in second language acquisition. . In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 467-488). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Plass, J. L., Chun D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner D. (2003). Cognitive load in reading a foreign language text with multimedia aids and the influence of verbal and spatial abilities. Computers in Human Behavior, 19, 221-243.
Plass, J. L., Chun, D. M., Mayer, R. E., & Leutner, D. (1998). Supporting visual and verbal learning preferences in a second-language multimedia learning environment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 25-36.
Plass, J. L., Kalyuga, S., & Leutner, D. (2010). Individual Differences and Cognitive Load Theory. In J. L. Plass, R. Moreno, & R. Brünken (Eds.) Cognitive Load Theory (pp. 65-87). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Roby, W. (1999). “WHAT’S IN A GLOSS?” Language Learning & Technology, 2(2), 94-101.
Sakar, A. & Ercetin, G. (2005). Effectiveness of hypermedia annotations for foreign language reading. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 28-38.
Schmitt, N. (2008). Review article: instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research, 12(3), 329-363.
Shahrokni, S. A. (2009). Second language incidental vocabulary learning: The effect of online textual, pictorial, and textual pictorial glosses. TESL-EJ, 13(3). Retrieved June 1, 2010, from http://www.tesl-ej.org/wordpress/issues/volume13/ej51/ej51a3/
Sumak, B., Hericko, M., Pusnik, M, & Polancic G. (2011). Factors affecting acceptance and use of Moodle: An empirical study based on TAM. Informatica, 35, 91-100.
Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in it development. In S. M. Gass, & C. G. Maddn (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235-253). Rowley, MA: Newbury House Publishers.
Sweller, J. (2005a). Implications of cognitive load theory for multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp. 19-30). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sweller, J. (2005b). The redundancy principle in multimedia learning. In R. E. Mayer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of multimedia learning (pp.159-168). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Sweller, J., van Merriënboer, J. J. G., & Pass, F. G. W. C. (1998). Cognitive architecture and instructional design. Educational Psychology Review, 10(3), 251-296.
Tabatabaei, O. & Shams, N. (2011). The effect of multimedia glosses on online computerized L2 text comprehension and vocabulary learning of Iranian EFL learners. Journal of Language Teaching and Research, 2(3), 714-725.
Taylor, I. & Taylor, M. (1990). Psycholinguistics: Learning and using language. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Tseng, Y. F. (2010). The Effects of Multimedia Annotations on EFL Young Adults’Incidental Vocabulary Learning with a Focus on Unfamiliar Concepts. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.
Turk, E. & Ercetin, G. (2012). Effects of interactive versus simultaneous display of multimedia glosses on L2 reading comprehension and incidental vocabulary learning. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-25.
Van Merriënboer, J. J. G. & Sweller, J. (2005). Cognitive load theory and complex learning: Recent developments and future directions. Educational Psychology Review, 17(2), 147-177.
Watanabe, Y. (1997). Input, intake, and retention: Effects of increased processing on incidental learning of foreign language vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(3), 287-307.
Webb, S. (2005). The effects of reading and writing on word knowledge. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27, 33-52.
Yanguas, I. (2009). Multimedia glosses and their effect on L2 text comprehension and vocabulary learning. Language Learning & Technology, 13(2), 48-67.
Yeh, Y., & Wang, C. (2003). Effects of multimedia vocabulary annotations and learning styles on vocabulary learning. CALICO Journal, 21(1), 131-144.
Yeung, A. S. & Lee, C. F. K., Pena, I. M., & Ryde, J. (2000). Toward a subjective mental workload measure. Paper presented at the International Congress for School Effectiveness and Improvement, Hong Kong, China. Retrieved from http://www.eric.ed.gov:80/ERICWebPortal/contentdelivery/servlet/ERICServlet?accno=ED446117
Yoshii, M. (2006). L1 and L2 glosses: their effects on incidental vocabulary learning. Language Learning & Technology, 10(3), 85-101.
Yoshii, M., & Flaitz, J. (2002). Second language incidental vocabulary retention: The effect of picture and annotation types. CALICO Journal, 20(1), 33-58.
Yu, Y. C. (2011). Effects of MMS on vocabulary learning: A study of Taiwanese junior high school learners of English. Unpublished master’s thesis, National Taiwan Normal University, Taipei, Taiwan.

本全文未授權公開

簡易檢索 / 詳目顯示

相關論文