Keywords
spacing effect
spaced/massed practice
explicit/tacit vocabulary knowledge
semantic priming
How to Cite
Number of views: 0
Number of downloads: 0
Abstract
Research suggests that spaced learning, which incorporates intervals between repetitions of material, facilitates second language (L2) learning more than massed learning, where a given item is repeated multiple times without any intervening trials or time. Although prior studies have suggested that spacing enhances the acquisition of explicit knowledge, it remains unclear whether it aids the acquisition of implicit knowledge. The present study replicated Nakata and Elgort’s (2021) study to investigate how massing and spacing impact the acquisition of explicit and implicit vocabulary knowledge in L2. In the present study, 69 Japanese students learning (L2) English studied 48 pseudowords using either massed or spaced repetition. A meaning recall test (immediate and delayed) and a delayed meaning-form matching test assessed participants’ explicit knowledge. A semantic priming task (immediate and delayed) measured implicit knowledge. Posttest results showed that spaced learning led to better explicit vocabulary acquisition compared to massed learning. For implicit knowledge development, however, (a) neither schedule was effective, and (b) no significant difference was found between the two schedules.
Funding
This research was supported in part by a Japanese Society for the Promotion of Science Grant-in-Aid for Research (#24K04110).
References
Bird, S. (2010). Effects of distributed practice on the acquisition of second language English syntax. Applied Psycholinguistics, 32 (2), 635-650.
Carpenter, S. K., & Mueller, F. E. (2013). The effects of interleaving versus blocking on foreign language pronunciation learning. Memory & Cognition, 41(5), 671-682.
Cepeda, N. J., Coburn, N., Rohrer, D., Wixted, J. T., Mozer, M. C., & Pashler, H. (2009). Optimizing distributed practice: Theoretical analysis and practical implications. Experimental Psychology, 56(4), 236-246.
Cepeda, N. J., Pashler, H., Vul, E., Wixted, J. T., & Rohrer, D. (2006). Distributed practice in verbal recall tasks: A review and quantitative synthesis. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 354-380.
Chun, E., Choi, S., & Kim, J. (2012). The effect of extensive reading and paired-associate learning on long-term vocabulary retention: An event-related potential study. Neuroscience Letters, 521(2), 125-129.
DeKeyser, R., & Suzuki, Y. (2025). Skill acquisition theory. In B. VanPatten, G. Keating, & S. Wulff (Eds.), Theories in second language acquisition: An introduction (4th ed., pp. 157-182). Routledge.
Elgort, I. (2011). Deliberate learning and vocabulary acquisition in a second language. Language Learning, 61(2), 367-413.
Elgort, I., & Piasecki, A. E. (2014). The effect of a bilingual learning mode on the establishment of lexical semantic representations in the L2. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(3), 572-588.
Elgort, I., & Warren, P. (2014). L2 vocabulary learning from reading: Explicit and tacit lexical knowledge and the role of learner and item variables. Language Learning, 64(2), 365-414.
Ellis, N. (2015). Implicit and explicit language learning: Their dynamic interface and complexity. In P. Rebuschat (Ed.), Implicit and explicit learning of languages (pp. 3-23). John Benjamins.
Fang, N., Elgort, I., & Chen, Z. (2024). Effects of retrieval schedules on the acquisition of explicit, automatized-explicit, and implicit knowledge of L2 collocations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 46(3), 663-685.
Karpicke, J. D., & Bauernschmidt, A. (2011). Spaced retrieval: Absolute spacing enhances learning regardless of relative spacing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(5), 1250-1257.
Kasprowicz, R. E., Marsden, E., & Sephton, N. (2019). Investigating distribution of practice effects for the learning of foreign language verb morphology in the young learner classroom. Modern Language Journal, 103(3), 580-606.
Kim, S. K., & Webb, S. (2022). The effects of spaced practice on second language learning: A meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 72(1), 269-319.
Kobayashi, A., & Okubo, M. (2014). Assessment of working memory capacity with a Japanese version of the Operation Span Test. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 85(1), 60-68.
Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Learning concepts and categories: Is spacing the “enemy of induction?” Psychological Science, 19(6), 585-592.
Laufer, B. (2003). Vocabulary acquisition in a second language: Do learners really acquire most vocabulary by reading? Some empirical evidence. Canadian Modern Language Review, 59(4), 567-587.
Li, M., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). Distribution of practice effects in the acquisition and retention of L2 mandarin tonal word production. Modern Language Journal, 103(3), 607-628.
Nakata, T. (2015). Effects of expanding and equal spacing on second language vocabulary learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(4), 677-711.
Nakata, T. (2020). Learning words with flash cards and word cards. In S. Webb (Ed.), Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (pp. 304-319). Routledge.
Nakata, T., & Elgort, I. (2021). Effects of spacing on contextual vocabulary learning: Spacing facilitates the acquisition of explicit, but not tacit, vocabulary knowledge. Second Language Research, 37(2), 233-260.
Nakata, T., & Suzuki, Y. (2019a). Effects of massing and spacing on the learning of semantically related and unrelated words. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(2), 287-311.
Nakata, T., & Suzuki, Y. (2019b). Mixing grammar exercises facilitates long-term retention: Effects of blocking, interleaving, and increasing practice. Modern Language Journal, 103(3), 629-647.
Nakata, T., Suzuki, Y., & He, X. (2023). Costs and benefits of spacing for second language vocabulary learning: Does relearning override the positive and negative effects of spacing? Language Learning, 73(3), 799-834.
Nakata, T., & Webb, S. (2016). Does studying vocabulary in smaller sets increase learning? The effects of part and whole learning on second language vocabulary acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 523-552.
Nation, P. (2022). Learning vocabulary in another language (3rd ed.). Cambridge University Press.
Nation, P., & Beglar, D. (2007). A vocabulary size test. The Language Teacher, 31(7), 9-13.
Pan, S. C., Tajran, J., Lovelett, J., Osuna, J., & Rickard, T. C. (2019). Does interleaved practice enhance foreign language learning? The effects of training schedule on Spanish verb conjugation skills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 111(7), 1172-1188.
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878-912.
Rogers, J. (2015). Learning second language syntax under massed and distributed conditions. TESOL Quarterly, 49(4), 857-866.
Rogers, J. (2021). Input spacing in second language classroom settings: Replications of Bird (2010) and Serrano (2011). Language Teaching, 54(3), 424-433.
Rogers, J., & Cheung, A. (2021). Does it matter when you review? Input spacing, ecological validity, and the learning of L2 vocabulary. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 43(5), 1138-1156.
Serrano, R. (2022). A state-of-the-art review of distribution-of-practice effects on L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 12(3), 355-379.
Serrano, R., & Huang, H.-Y. (2021). Time distribution and intentional vocabulary learning through repeated reading: A partial replication and extension. Language Awareness, 32(1), 1-18.
Serrano, R., & Pellicer-Sánchez, A. (2024). Online processing and vocabulary learning in massed versus spaced repeated reading. Vigo International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 21, 129-164.
Suzuki, Y. (2017). The optimal distribution of practice for the acquisition of L2 morphology: A conceptual replication and extension. Language Learning, 67(3), 512-545.
Suzuki, Y., & DeKeyser, R. (2017). Effects of distributed practice on the proceduralization of morphology. Language Teaching Research, 21(2), 166-188.
Suzuki, Y., Nakata, T., & DeKeyser, R. (2019). The desirable difficulty framework as a theoretical foundation for optimizing and researching second language practice. Modern Language Journal, 103(3), 713-720.
Suzuki, Y., Nakata, T., & Rogers, J. (2023). Optimizing input and intake processing: A role for practice and explicit learning. In Y. Suzuki (Ed.), Practice and automatization in second language research: Theory, methods, and pedagogical implications (pp. 39-62). Routledge.
Suzuki, Y., Yokosawa, S., & Aline, D. (2020). The role of working memory in blocked and interleaved grammar practice: Proceduralization of L2 syntax. Language Teaching Research, 26(4), 671-695.
Taylor, K., & Rohrer, D. (2010). The effects of interleaved practice. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 24(6), 837-848.
Webb, S., & Chang, A. C.-S. (2015). Second language vocabulary learning through extensive reading with audio support: How do frequency and distribution of occurrence affect learning? Language Teaching Research, 19(6), 667-686.
Wiseheart, M., Kim, A. S. N., Kapler, I. V., Foot-Seymour, V., & Kupper-Tetzel, C. E. (2019). Enhancing the quality of student learning using distributed practice. In J. Dunlosky & K. A. Rawson (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of cognition and education (pp. 550-584). Cambridge University Press.
Zung, I., Imundo, M. N., & Pan, S. C. (2022). How do college students use digital flashcards during self-regulated learning? Memory, 30(8), 923-941.
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Guangliang Zheng, Tatsuya Nakata , Jon Clenton, TJ Boutorwick
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.