The Word Associates Format: Validation evidence

Norbert Schmitt · Janice Wun Ching Ng · John Garras

108 citations0/0 files storedLanguage Testing

No readable copy stored yet — this record is metadata only.

No open-access location is known for this record yet.

Literature note Cite in a project Citation map

Second Language Acquisition and Learning Reading and Literacy Development Psychometric Methodologies and Testing

Abstract

Although the Word Associates Format (WAF) is becoming more frequently used as a depth-of-knowledge measure, relatively little validation has been carried out on it. This report of two validation studies tackles various important WAF issues yet to be satisfactorily resolved. Study 1 conducted introspective interviews regarding students’ WAF test-taking behavior along with interviews on featured target words to determine how accurately the most common scoring system for the WAF reflects the examinees’ actual knowledge of the words. Analysis is provided concerning WAF accuracy and item answering strategies and patterns. Study 2 repeated the interview procedures from Study 1 with several modifications, including the addition of a receptive dimension in the word knowledge interview. The various WAF-scoring methods were compared, and the format types (6 and 8 option), distractor types, and distribution of answers were examined in depth. Both studies indicate that the WAF reflects true lexical knowledge fairly well at the extremes of the scoring scale while scores in the middle do not lead to any reliable interpretation. Furthermore, there is the likelihood that the WAF may both underestimate and overestimate vocabulary knowledge. Suggestions regarding item construction and use of the WAF are given to improve its accuracy and reliability.

Paper brief

Loading…

Cite this work

Citation unavailable for this work.

BibTeX RIS CSL-JSON

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Citations in this library

Citation map →

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 108 citations exist upstream.

References

2001Learning Vocabulary in Another Language 2000A New Academic Word List 2021Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 2010Research Methods in Applied Linguistics 2008Review article: Instructed second language vocabulary learning 2000Assessing Vocabulary 2001Developing and exploring the behaviour of two new versions of the Vocabulary Levels Test 2010Researching Vocabulary

Cited by

2015The Relationship Between Vocabulary Learning Strategies and Breadth and Depth of Vocabulary Knowledge 2020Word association research and the L2 lexicon 2021Vocabulary size and depth as predictors of second language speaking ability 2017Vocabulary knowledge in the production of written texts: a case study on EFL language learners 2015A Study on the Relationship between English Reading Comprehension and English Vocabulary Knowledge

Explore the map →

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.

Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.