The Korean Association for the Study of English Language and Linguistics

Current Issue

Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 20

[ Article ]
Korea Journal of English Language and Linguistics - Vol. 20, No. 1, pp.141-156
Abbreviation: KASELL
ISSN: 1598-1398 (Print)
Print publication date 31 Mar 2020
Received 03 Apr 2020 Revised 23 May 2020 Accepted 31 May 2020

The Effects of Task-Induced Involvement on L2 Academic Word Acquisition in Korea
Kang, Dongho
Seoul Nat’l Univ. of Science and Technology

Copyright 2020 KASELL
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0, which permits unrestricted, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Funding Information ▼


The study investigated the effects of task-induced involvement on academic vocabulary acquisition at both short- and long-term periods after treatment. Twenty-nine college students in Korea were randomly assigned to one of the three tasks: Read-without-glossary, Gap-fill-with-glossary, and Gap-fill-without-glossary. The ANCOVA statistics showed no significant differences among the three tasks, but the learning gains between pre-test and post-test was the most significant statistically in the input task (Read without glossary), compared with the output tasks (Gap-fill with glossary and Gap-fill without glossary). The finding could be due to the fact that academic vocabulary requires more intensive reading than general vocabulary, leading to more vocabulary learning gains.

Keywords: involvement load hypothesis, academic vocabulary, EFL college contexts


This study was supported by the Research Program funded by the SeoulTech (Seoul National University of Science and Technology).

1. Alavinia, P. and H. Rahimi. 2019. Task types effects and task involvement load on vocabulary learning of EFL learners. International Journal of Instruction 12(1), 1501-1516.
2. Bao, G. 2015. Task type effects on English as a Foreign Language learners’ acquisition of receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge. System 53, 84-95.
3. Eckerth, J. and P. Tavakoli. 2012. The effects of word exposure frequency and elaboration of word processing on incidental L2 vocabulary acquisition through reading. Language Teaching Research 16(2), 227-252.
4. Gablasova, D. 2014. Learning and retaining specialized vocabulary from textbook reading: Comparison of learning outcomes through L1 and L2. The Modern Language Journal 98(4), 976-991.
5. Grim, F. 2008. Integrating focus on form in L2 content-enriched instruction lessons. Foreign Language Annals 41(2), 321-346.
6. Hulstijn, J. H. and B. Laufer. 2001. Some empirical evidence for the involvement load hypothesis in vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning, 51, 539–558.
7. Joe, A. 2010. The quality and frequency of encounters with vocabulary in an English for Academic Purposes programme. Reading in a Foreign Language 22(1), 117–138.
8. Jozwik, S. L. and K. H. Douglas. 2017. Effects of multicomponent academic vocabulary instruction for English learners with learning difficulties. Learning Disability Quarterly 40(4), 237-250.
9. Keating, G. D. 2008. Task effectiveness and word learning in a second language: The involvement loading hypothesis on trial. Language Teaching Research 12(3), 365-386.
10. Kim, J. Y. 2015. The effects of task-induced involvement and learners’ English proficiency on English vocabulary learning. English Language Teaching 27(3), 105-129.
11. Kim, Y. 2011. The role of task-induced involvement and learner proficiency in L2 vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning 61(1), 100-140.
12. Laufer, B. 2006. Comparing focus on form and focus on formS in second-language vocabulary learning. The Canadian Modern Language Review 63, 149–166.
13. Laufer, B. and J. Hulstijn. 2001. Incidental vocabulary acquisition in a second language: The construct of task-induced involvement. Applied Linguistics 22(1), 1-26.
14. Li, G. 2014. Effect of task-induced online learning behavior on incidental vocabulary acquisition by Chinese learners—revisiting involvement load hypothesis. Theory and Practice in Language Studies 4(7), 1385-1394.
15. Maftoon, P. and M. S. Haratmeh. 2013. Effects of input and output-oriented tasks with different involvement loads on the receptive vocabulary knowledge of Iranian EFL learners. Research in English Language Pedagogy 1(1), 24-38.
16. Nagy, W. and D. Townsend. 2012. Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly 47(1), 91-108.
17. Park, H. 2017. Task-induced involvement load in Korean EFL adult learners’ incidental vocabulary learning. Studies in English Education 22(3), 27-53.
18. Park, J. and J. Oh. 2015. Effects of task-induced vocabulary learning involvement on vocabulary learning by Korean university students. English Language Teaching 27(3), 175-191.
19. Peters, E. Hulstijn, J. H. Sercu, L. and M. Lutjeharms. 2009. Learning L2 German vocabulary through reading: The effect of three enhancement techniques compared. Language Learning 59(1), 113–151.
20. Richards, J. C. and T. S. Rodgers. 2014. Approaches and Methods in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge Language Teaching Library.
21. Roling, K. L. 2017. Enhancing Academic Vocabulary Learning in English Language Learners: Applications of the Cognitive Principles of Elaboration and Retrieval Practice in Intervention. A doctoral dissertation. The University of Wisconsin: Madison.
22. Schmitt, N. 2008. Review article: Instructed second language vocabulary learning. Language Teaching Research 12(3), 329–363.
23. Soleimani, H. and M. Rahmanian. 2015. Vocabulary acquisition and task effectiveness in involvement load hypothesis: A case in Iran. International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 4(5), 198-205.
24. Sung, H. 2016. Task-induced involvement load and low-level learners’ vocabulary learning. Modern English Education 17(4), 1-24.
25. Tahmasbi, M. and M. T. Farvardin. 2017. Probing the effects of task types on EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge: The case of involvement load hypothesis. SAGE Open 7(3), 1-10.
26. Yang, Y. Shintani, N. Li, S. and Y. Zhang. 2017. The effectiveness of post-reading word-focused activities and their associations with working memory. System 70, 38-49.

Dongho Kang (Professor)Dept. of English Language & Literature,Seoul National Univ. of Science & Technology,138 Gongenung gil, Nowon-gu, Seoul 139-743, KoreaPhone: (02) 970-6250Email: