1- Department of English Language, CT.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran , amirreza.mahmoudi4396@iau.ac.ir
2- Department of English Language, CT.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of English Language, Ke.C., Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
2- Department of English Language, CT.C., Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran
3- Department of English Language, Ke.C., Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran
Abstract: (80 Views)
Objective: Laufer’s three “I” model (Input, Interaction, and Involvement) and its extended five “I” framework have been proposed as influential models for vocabulary acquisition in second language learning. However, limited research has examined their comparative effects within digital learning environments, particularly among Iranian EFL learners. This study investigated the impact of Laufer’s three “I” model and the extended five “I” framework on incidental and intentional vocabulary learning in a digital context. It also explored learners’ perceptions of the progressive “I” model.
Methods: A mixed-methods design was employed, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Sixty Iranian EFL learners were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Data were collected through pre- and post-tests and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests, while qualitative data were thematically analyzed.
Results: The results indicated no statistically significant differences between instructional models for incidental vocabulary learning. However, intentional vocabulary learning significantly improved among learners exposed to the five “I” model, particularly in the areas of Input, Interaction, and Interpretation. Qualitative findings revealed positive learner perceptions of the progressive “I” model, with participants reporting increased motivation, reduced anxiety, and greater confidence in vocabulary use.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that incidental vocabulary learning is less affected by instructional interventions, whereas intentional learning benefits from structured and interactive approaches. The progressive five “I” model appears to enhance learner engagement, autonomy, and affective factors in digitally mediated EFL contexts. Pedagogical implications for vocabulary instruction in digital environments are discussed.
Methods: A mixed-methods design was employed, incorporating both quantitative and qualitative approaches. Sixty Iranian EFL learners were randomly assigned to experimental and control groups. Data were collected through pre- and post-tests and semi-structured interviews. Quantitative data were analyzed using ANOVA and Tukey HSD tests, while qualitative data were thematically analyzed.
Results: The results indicated no statistically significant differences between instructional models for incidental vocabulary learning. However, intentional vocabulary learning significantly improved among learners exposed to the five “I” model, particularly in the areas of Input, Interaction, and Interpretation. Qualitative findings revealed positive learner perceptions of the progressive “I” model, with participants reporting increased motivation, reduced anxiety, and greater confidence in vocabulary use.
Conclusions: The findings suggest that incidental vocabulary learning is less affected by instructional interventions, whereas intentional learning benefits from structured and interactive approaches. The progressive five “I” model appears to enhance learner engagement, autonomy, and affective factors in digitally mediated EFL contexts. Pedagogical implications for vocabulary instruction in digital environments are discussed.
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons - Attribution 4.0 International. |