基桩水平静载试验的三维非线性有限元模拟 殷芳陈

Low = abstractness, high = concreteness, spaced = spaced learning, massed = massed learning
Purposes
This study is an attempt to examine how word concreteness and spacing each affect EFL learner’s recall of word meaning, and how they interact on EFL learner’s recall. Specifically, it is to investigate the following two questions: 1. How do word concreteness and spacing each contribute to EFL vocabulary acquisition? 2. Is there any interaction between word concreteness and spacing for EFL vocabulary acquisition?
Effects of Word Concreteness and Spacing on EFL Vocabulary Acquisition
吴翼飞 （南京工业大学，外国语言文学学院，江苏 南京211816）
Introduction
Vocabulary acquisition is of great significance for L2 learners. One of the most important features of vocabulary is concreteness and one of the most effective ways of learning seems to be spacing. A few studies have been conducted on vocabulary acquisition in terms of word concreteness and spacing. The concreteness effect has been confirmed mostly in L1 studies. However, few studies reached consistent conclusions in the field of second language learning. Although several studies have found the spacing effect in vocabulary learning, little has been done with regard to the interactive effect between word concreteness and (learning) spacing. The thesis examines the effects of word concreteness and spacing (spaced and massed distribution) and their interactive effect on EFL vocabulary acquisition.
Concrete 1.16
Method
The study employed a 2 (concreteness) × 2 (spacing) research design. Word concreteness was a within-subjects variable and spacing was a between-subjects variable. Word concreteness had two levels, i.e., high and low concreteness. Spacing also had two levels, i.e., massed and spaced learning. EFL vocabulary acquisition was the dependent variable, measured in terms of receptive vocabulary knowledge. 52 second year English majors participated in this experiment. They came from two intact classes and were randomly assigned to one of the two vocabulary learning tasks (spaced and massed learning). 20 target words (10 words with high concreteness and 10 words with low concreteness) were chosen for this study. This study utilized Min’s (2008) 4-item modified VKS (Vocabulary Knowledge Scale). The reading and true or false judgment tasks, and the modified VSK were pilot-tested with 5 non-participants. During the experiment, each group of participants was asked to finish the sentence reading task and true or false judgments within the maximum time limits as stipulated in the instructions. The spaced group finished the 20 sentence reading task with target words. The next day, they read another set of 20 sentences with the same target words again. The massed group were assigned to the 40 sentence reading task once on the same day when the spaced group was tested the second time. On the third day, the two groups took the post-test of the target words. All the test data were collected and they were all valid. Data are submitted to SPSS 16.0 and analyzed by a mixed ANOVA.
4.00 3.50 3.00 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.00 spaced low high massed 2.17 3.43 2.83 2.74
Figure 4.1 Means plot
As is shown in Figure 4.1, the spaced learning group outperforms the massed learning group in the acquisition of concrete words, while it is true of the other way round in the acquisition of abstract words. Furthermore, in the spaced distribution group, concrete words are better acquired than abstract words, while a small or no difference was found for the massed learning. All these suggest an interaction between word concreteness and spacing on EFL vocabulary acquisition.
Box's M 6.66 F 2.11 df1 3 df2 348500 p 0.4 p 1.00 0.29
Assumptions of a mixed AVONA Table 4.2 Box's test of equality of covariance Table 4.3 Levene's test of equality of error variances