Reading and Writing

, Volume 32, Issue 2, pp 285–306 | Cite as

Academic vocabulary and reading comprehension: exploring the relationships across measures of vocabulary knowledge

  • Joshua Fahey LawrenceEmail author
  • Aste Mjelve Hagen
  • Jin Kyoung Hwang
  • Grace Lin
  • Arne Lervåg


This study examined the relationship between knowledge of academic vocabulary and reading comprehension in data contributed by 5855 middle school students. Each student completed an academic vocabulary assessment, a standardized reading comprehension test, and one of four types of novel vocabulary-depth measures. Multiword expressions examined students’ abilities to complete formulaic phrases. Topical associates items required students to identify a target word that was topically related to three others. The hypernyms task required students to identify the superordinate for each target word. The definitions task asked students to choose the definition of the target word. We modeled the relationship between performance on the reading comprehension task and each of the four types of assessments using a residual factors approach (Bentler & Satorra, 2000) with latent variables. Even though each depth measure tested exactly the same sets of words, we found that these measures had a differential impact on reading comprehension, with the definitions task explaining the largest portion of variance in reading comprehension beyond overall academic vocabulary. The knowledge of multiword expressions and topical associates—but not of hypernyms—also explained unique variance in reading comprehension even when controlling for academic vocabulary knowledge.


Academic vocabulary Vocabulary depth Assessment Adolescent Reading comprehension 



This work was supported by Grant No. R305A090555, Word Generation: An Efficacy Trial from the Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education (Catherine Snow, PI) and Grant No. R305A080647, Measuring the Development of Vocabulary and Word Learning to Support Content Area Reading and Learning (Paul Deane, PI).


  1. Anderson, R. C., & Freebody, P. (1981). Vocabulary knowledge. In J. T. Guthrie (Ed.), Comprehension and teaching: Research reviews (pp. 77–117). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Google Scholar
  2. Anderson, R. C., & Ortony, A. (1975). On putting apples into bottles—A problem of polysemy. Cognitive Psychology, 7(2), 167–180.Google Scholar
  3. Anderson, R. C., Pichert, J. W., Goetz, E. T., Schallert, D. L., Stevens, K. V., & Trollip, S. R. (1976). Instantiation of general terms. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 15(6), 667–679. Scholar
  4. Beck, I., McKeown, M. G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.Google Scholar
  5. Beck, I., Perfetti, C. A., & McKeown, M. (1982). Effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on lexical access and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74(4), 506–521.Google Scholar
  6. Bentler, P. M., & Satorra, A. (2000). Hierarchical regression without phantom factors. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 7(2), 287–291. Scholar
  7. Biber, D., Conrad, S., & Cortes, V. (2004). If you look at…: Lexical bundles in university teaching and textbooks. Applied Linguistics, 25(3), 371–405.Google Scholar
  8. Bolger, D., Balass, M., Landen, E., & Perfetti, C. (2008). Context variation and definitions in learning the meanings of words: An instance-based learning approach. Discourse Processes, 45(2), 122–159.Google Scholar
  9. Brainerd, C. J., & Reyna, V. F. (2005). The science of false memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. Cain, K., & Oakhill, J. (2014). Reading comprehension and vocabulary: Is vocabulary more important for some aspects of comprehension. L’Année Psychologique, 114, 647–662.Google Scholar
  11. Carroll, J. B. (1941). A factor analysis of verbal abilities. Psychometrika, 6(5), 279–307. Scholar
  12. Cole, D. A., & Preacher, K. J. (2014). Manifest variable path analysis: potentially serious and misleading consequences due to uncorrected measurement error. Psychological Methods, 19(2), 300–315. Scholar
  13. Collins, A. M., & Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Memory and Language, 8(2), 240–247.Google Scholar
  14. Conklin, K., & Schmitt, N. (2008). Formulaic sequences: Are they processed more quickly than nonformulaic language by native and nonnative speakers? Applied Linguistics, 29(1), 72–89. Scholar
  15. Conrad, C. (1972). Cognitive economy in semantic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92(2), 149. Scholar
  16. Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.Google Scholar
  17. Cromley, J. G., & Azevedo, R. (2007). Testing and refining the direct and inferential mediation model of reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(2), 311–325. Scholar
  18. Deane, P., Lawless, R. R., Li, C., Sabatini, J., Bejar, I. I., & O’Reilly, T. (2014). Creating vocabulary item types that measure students’ depth of semantic knowledge. ETS Research Report Series, 2014(1), 1–19. Scholar
  19. Eddington, C. M., & Tokowicz, N. (2015). How meaning similarity influences ambiguous word processing: the current state of the literature. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22(1), 13–37. Scholar
  20. Elleman, A. M., Lindo, E. J., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(1), 1–44. Scholar
  21. Ellis, N. C., Simpson-Vlach, R., & Maynard, C. (2008). Formulaic language in native and second language speakers: Psycholinguistics, corpus linguistics, and TESOL. TESOL Quarterly, 42(3), 375–396. Scholar
  22. Foraker, S., & Murphy, G. L. (2012). Polysemy in sentence comprehension: Effects of meaning dominance. Journal of Memory and Language, 67(4), 407–425. Scholar
  23. Gardner, D. (2007). Children’s immediate understanding of vocabulary: Contexts and dictionary definitions. Reading Psychology, 28(4), 331–373.Google Scholar
  24. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. Scholar
  25. Haastrup, K., & Henriksen, B. (2000). Vocabulary acquisition: acquiring depth of knowledge through network building. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(2), 221–240. Scholar
  26. Halff, H. M., Ortony, A., & Anderson, R. C. (1976). A context-sensitive representation of word meanings. Memory & Cognition, 4(4), 378–383. Scholar
  27. Huth, A. G., de Heer, W. A., Griffiths, T. L., Theunissen, F. E., & Gallant, J. L. (2016). Natural speech reveals the semantic maps that tile human cerebral cortex. Nature, 532(7600), 453–458. Scholar
  28. Hyland, K. (2012). Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150–169. Scholar
  29. Jenkins, J. J. (1970). The 1952 Minnesota word association norms. In L. Postman & G. Keppel (Eds.), Norms of word association (pp. 1–38). London, UK: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  30. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1983). Mental models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Kučera, H., & Francis, W. N. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
  32. Kuperman, V., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2013). Reassessing word frequency as a determinant of word recognition for skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39(3), 802–823. Scholar
  33. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Towards a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. Scholar
  34. Lawrence, J. F., Crosson, A. C., Paré-Blagoev, E. J., & Snow, C. E. (2015). Word Generation randomized trial: Discussion mediates the impact of program treatment on academic word learning. American Educational Research Journal, 52(4), 750–786. Scholar
  35. Lawrence, J. F., Francis, D., Paré-Blagoev, J., & Snow, C. E. (2017). The poor get richer: Heterogeneity in the efficacy of a school-level intervention for academic language. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 10(4), 767–793. Scholar
  36. Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., Faller, E., & Kelley, J. (2010). The effectiveness and ease of implementation of an academic vocabulary intervention for linguistically diverse students in urban middle schools. Reading Research Quarterly, 45(2), 196–228.Google Scholar
  37. Lesaux, N. K., Kieffer, M. J., Kelley, J. G., & Harris, J. R. (2014). Effects of academic vocabulary instruction for linguistically diverse adolescents: Evidence from a randomized field trial. American Educational Research Journal, 51(6), 1159–1194. Scholar
  38. MacGinitie, W. H., MacGinitie, R. K., Maria, K., & Dreyer, L. G. (2000). Gates-MacGinitie reading test technical report: Forms S and T. Chicago, IL: The Riverside Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  39. Manning, C. D., & Schuetze, H. (1999). Foundations of statistical natural language processing, collocations. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
  40. Martinez, R., & Murphy, V. A. (2011). Effect of frequency and idiomaticity on second language reading comprehension. TESOL Quarterly, 45(2), 267–290. Scholar
  41. McKeown, M. G., Beck, I. L., Omanson, R. C., & Perfetti, C. A. (1983). The effects of long-term vocabulary instruction on reading comprehension: A replication. Journal of Reading Behavior, 15(1), 3–18.Google Scholar
  42. Miller, G. A., & Gildea, P. M. (1987). How children learn words. Scientific American, 257(3), 94–99.Google Scholar
  43. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2015). Mplus user’s guide. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.Google Scholar
  44. Nagy, W. (2007). Metalinguistic awareness and the vocabulary-comprehension connection. In R. K. Wagner, A. E. Muse, & K. R. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Vocabulary acquisition: Implications for reading comprehension (pp. 52–77). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar
  45. Oakhill, J., Cain, K., McCarthy, D., & Nightingale, Z. (2012). Making the link between vocabulary knowledge and comprehension skill. In A. Britt, S. Goldman, & J.-F. Rouet (Eds.), From words to reading for understanding (pp. 101–114). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  46. Ouellette, G. P. (2006). What’s meaning got to do with it: The role of vocabulary in word reading and reading comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(3), 554–566. Scholar
  47. Pany, D., Jenkins, J. R., & Schreck, J. (1982). Vocabulary instruction: Effects on word knowledge and reading comprehension. Learning Disability Quarterly, 5(3), 202–215. Scholar
  48. Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. Scholar
  49. Perfetti, C., & Hart, L. (2002). The lexical quality hypothesis. In L. Verhoeven, C. Elbro, & P. Reitsma (Eds.), Precursors of functional literacy (pp. 189–213). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
  50. Perfetti, C., & Stafura, J. (2014). Word knowledge in a theory of reading comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 18(1), 22–37. Scholar
  51. Perfetti, C., Wlotko, E. W., & Hart, L. A. (2005). Word learning and individual differences in word learning reflected in event-related potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1281–1292.Google Scholar
  52. Quinn, J. M., Wagner, R. K., Petscher, Y., & Lopez, D. (2015). Developmental relations between vocabulary knowledge and reading comprehension: A latent change score modeling study. Child Development, 86(1), 159–175. Scholar
  53. Reyna, V. F., & Kiernan, B. (1994). Development of gist versus verbatim memory in sentence recognition: Effects of lexical familiarity, semantic content, encoding instructions, and retention interval. Developmental Psychology, 30(2), 178.Google Scholar
  54. Richter, T., Isberner, M.-B., Naumann, J., & Neeb, Y. (2013). Lexical quality and reading comprehension in primary school children. Scientific Studies of Reading: The Official Journal of the Society for the Scientific Study of Reading, 17(6), 415–434.Google Scholar
  55. Roediger, H. L., & McDermott, K. B. (1995). Creating false memories: Remembering words not presented in lists. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(4), 803–814. Scholar
  56. Roediger, H. L. I., & McDermott, K. B. (1999). False alarms and false memories. Psychological Review, 106(2), 406–410. Scholar
  57. Schaeffer, B., & Wallace, R. (1970). The comparison of word meanings. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86(2), 144. Scholar
  58. Schmitt, N., Jiang, X., & Grabe, W. (2011). The percentage of words known in a text and reading comprehension. The Modern Language Journal, 95(1), 26–43. Scholar
  59. Scott, J. A., & Nagy, W. E. (1997). Understanding the cefinitions of unfamiliar verbs. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(2), 184–200. Scholar
  60. Snow, C. E., Lawrence, J. F., & White, C. (2009). Generating knowledge of academic language among urban middle school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(4), 325–344. Scholar
  61. Snow, C. E., Porche, M. V., Tabors, P., & Harris, S. R. (2007). Is literacy enough?: Pathways to academic success for adolescents. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.Google Scholar
  62. Spearman, C. (1904). “General Intelligence”, objectively determined and measured. The American Journal of Psychology, 15(2), 201–292.Google Scholar
  63. Stahl, S. A., & Fairbanks, M. M. (1986). The effects of vocabulary instruction: A model-based meta-analysis. Review of Educational Research, 56(1), 72–110.Google Scholar
  64. Stahl, S. A., & Nagy, W. E. (2006). Teaching word meanings. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  65. Stanovich, K. E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–407.Google Scholar
  66. Sternberg, R. J., & Powell, J. S. (1983). Comprehending verbal comprehension. The American Psychologist, 38(8), 878–893.Google Scholar
  67. Tannenbaum, K. R., Torgesen, J. K., & Wagner, R. K. (2006). Relationships between word knowledge and reading comprehension in third-grade children. Scientific Studies of Reading, 10(4), 381–398.Google Scholar
  68. Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  69. Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2009). Differentiation of cognitive abilities across the life span. Developmental Psychology, 45(4), 1097–1118.Google Scholar
  70. Tunmer, W. E., & Herriman, M. L. (1984). The development of metalinguistic awareness: A conceptual overview. In W. E. Tunmer, C. Pratt, & M. L. Herriman (Eds.), Metalinguistic awareness in children (pp. 12–35). Berlin: Springer. Scholar
  71. Uccelli, P., Galloway, E. P., & Barr, C. D. (2015). Beyond vocabulary: Exploring cross-disciplinary academic-language proficiency and its association with reading comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly, 50(3), 337–356. Scholar
  72. Vanhove, M. (2008). From polysemy to semantic change: Towards a typology of lexical semantic associations (Vol. 106). Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing.Google Scholar
  73. Verhoeven, L., van Leeuwe, J., & Vermeer, A. (2011). Vocabulary growth and reading development across the elementary school years. Scientific Studies of Reading, 15(1), 8–25. Scholar
  74. Vermeer, A. (2001). Breadth and depth of vocabulary in relation to L1/L2 acquisition and frequency of input. Applied Psycholinguistics, 22(02), 217–234.Google Scholar
  75. Wagner, R. K., Torgesen, J. K., Rashotte, C. A., Hecht, S. A., Barker, T. A., Burgess, S. R., et al. (1997). Changing relations between phonological processing abilities and word-level reading as children develop from beginning to skilled readers: A 5-year longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 33(3), 469–479.Google Scholar
  76. Warriner, A. B., Kuperman, V., & Brysbaert, M. (2013). Norms of valence, arousal, and dominance for 13,915 English lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 45(4), 1191–1207. Scholar
  77. Weekes, B. S., Hamilton, S., Oakhill, J. V., & Holliday, R. E. (2008). False recollection in children with reading comprehension difficulties. Cognition, 106(1), 222–233. Scholar
  78. Wilkins, A. J. (1971). Conjoint frequency, category size, and categorization time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10(4), 382–385. Scholar
  79. Wittgenstein, L. (1958). Philosophical investigations. (G. E. M. Anscombe, Trans.) (2nd ed.). Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
  80. Yap, M. J., Tan, S. E., Pexman, P. M., & Hargreaves, I. S. (2011). Is more always better? Effects of semantic richness on lexical decision, speeded pronunciation, and semantic classification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(4), 742–750.Google Scholar
  81. Zeno, S. M., Ivens, S. H., Millard, R. T., & Duvvuri, R. (1995). The educator’s word frequency guide. Brewster, NY: Touchstone Applied Science Associates.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Joshua Fahey Lawrence
    • 1
    Email author
  • Aste Mjelve Hagen
    • 3
  • Jin Kyoung Hwang
    • 2
  • Grace Lin
    • 2
  • Arne Lervåg
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Educational SciencesUniversity of OsloOsloNorway
  2. 2.School of EducationUniversity of CaliforniaIrvineUSA
  3. 3.Department of Special Needs EducationUniversity of OsloOsloNorway

Personalised recommendations