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

Abstract

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

References

  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.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-5371(76)90059-1.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bentler, P. M., & Satorra, A. (2000). Hierarchical regression without phantom factors. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 7(2), 287–291. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15328007SEM0702_8.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Carroll, J. B. (1941). A factor analysis of verbal abilities. Psychometrika, 6(5), 279–307. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02288585.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0033805.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amm022.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Conrad, C. (1972). Cognitive economy in semantic memory. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 92(2), 149. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0032072.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Coxhead, A. (2000). A new academic word list. TESOL Quarterly, 34(2), 213–238.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.99.2.311.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/ets2.12001.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-014-0665-7.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802539200.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1545-7249.2008.tb00137.x.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.07.010.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Gardner, D. (2007). Children’s immediate understanding of vocabulary: Contexts and dictionary definitions. Reading Psychology, 28(4), 331–373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Gough, P. B., & Tunmer, W. E. (1986). Decoding, reading, and reading disability. Remedial and Special Education, 7(1), 6–10. https://doi.org/10.1177/074193258600700104.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2000.tb00149.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Halff, H. M., Ortony, A., & Anderson, R. C. (1976). A context-sensitive representation of word meanings. Memory & Cognition, 4(4), 378–383. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03213193.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1038/nature17637.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Hyland, K. (2012). Bundles in academic discourse. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 32, 150–169. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0267190512000037.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0030859.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. LaBerge, D., & Samuels, S. J. (1974). Towards a theory of automatic information processing in reading. Cognitive Psychology, 6(2), 293–323. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0285(74)90015-2.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831215579485.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345747.2016.1237596.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831214532165.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.247708.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Miller, G. A., & Gildea, P. M. (1987). How children learn words. Scientific American, 257(3), 94–99.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-06.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.2307/1510288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Perfetti, C. (2007). Reading ability: Lexical quality to comprehension. Scientific Studies of Reading, 11(4), 357–383. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888430701530730.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2013.827687.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12292.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.21.4.803.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Roediger, H. L. I., & McDermott, K. B. (1999). False alarms and false memories. Psychological Review, 106(2), 406–410. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.106.2.406.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Schaeffer, B., & Wallace, R. (1970). The comparison of word meanings. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86(2), 144. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0030086.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2011.01146.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  59. Scott, J. A., & Nagy, W. E. (1997). Understanding the cefinitions of unfamiliar verbs. Reading Research Quarterly, 32(2), 184–200. https://doi.org/10.1598/RRQ.32.2.4.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/19345740903167042.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Sternberg, R. J., & Powell, J. S. (1983). Comprehending verbal comprehension. The American Psychologist, 38(8), 878–893.

    Article  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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-69113-3_2.

    Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1002/rrq.104.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1080/10888438.2011.536125.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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.

    Article  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. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0314-x.

    Article  Google 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.01.005.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  78. Wilkins, A. J. (1971). Conjoint frequency, category size, and categorization time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 10(4), 382–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5371(71)80036-1.

    Article  Google 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.

    Article  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 

Download references

Acknowledgements

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).

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joshua Fahey Lawrence.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lawrence, J.F., Hagen, A.M., Hwang, J.K. et al. Academic vocabulary and reading comprehension: exploring the relationships across measures of vocabulary knowledge. Read Writ 32, 285–306 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-018-9865-2

Download citation

Keywords

  • Academic vocabulary
  • Vocabulary depth
  • Assessment
  • Adolescent
  • Reading comprehension