[FLEAT6] Emotional Valence and L2 Lexical Processing - The Making of L2 Experimental Word List for Japanese Learners of English

Friday, August 14th 2015 1:25pm-1:50 (Lamont Forum Room) the sixth joint Foreign Language Education and Technology Conference Venue: Boston, Harvard University

Session No. 127

Emotional Valence and L2 Lexical Processing: The Making of L2 Experimental Word List

for Japanese Learners of English

Key Take Homes

• Quality of processing matters in L2 lexical acquisition!

• Emotion-involved processing is THE promising construct!

• proto-JLE-ANEW is now ready!

2 Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August)

outline

• Introduction

• Quantity and quality of processing in vocabulary learning

• Chapter 1 – Models

• Chapter 2 – Emotion-Involved Processing

• Chapter 3 – Experimental Study

• References

Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 3

Introduction: Quantity and quality of processing in vocabulary learning


“Were all instructors to realize that the quality of mental

process, not the production of correct answers, is the measure of educative growth something hardly less than a revolution in

teaching would be worked.”

- John Dewey

Quantity of processing • Pimsleur’s (1967) memory schedule

• Repetition (e.g. Webb, 2007)

• Extensive reading (e.g. Mirzaii, 2012)

• Extensive listening (e.g. Alm, 2013) Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 5

Quality of processing • “Deep” processing (e.g. Kadota et al, 2006)

• Craik and Tulving (1975) – Levels of Processing (LoP) Model


apple

7

Quality of processing • “Deep” processing (e.g. Kadota & Ikemura, 2006)

• Craik and Tulving (1975) – Levels of Processing (LoP) Model


/æpl/

i. Orthographical processing

iii. Semantic processing

ii. Phonological processing

[APPLE]

Shallo

w - D

eep

Better Long-term Retention

Chapter 1 – Models


“Psychologically, our thought, apart

from its expression in words, is only a shapeless and indistinct mass.”

- Ferdinand De Saussure

Aims of this chapter

• How semantic processing has been regarded in variety of models of lexical access?

• As what has the structure of semantic representation been regarded?


super speed

Signifié and Signifiant (Saussure, 1916)


[APPLE]

/æpl/

Shallo

w - D

eep


signified signifier

Super Speed

Mental Lexicon model


(Levelt, 1989)

Super Speed

Triangle Connectionist PDP model


(Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989)

Super Speed

Logogen model (ver. 5)


(Morton, 1980)

Super Speed

WEAVER++ model

Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 15 http://www.nici.ru.nl/~ardiroel/Simulations.htm

(Levelt, Roelofs & Meyer, 1999)

Super Speed

http://www.nici.ru.nl/~ardiroel/Simulations.htm

Dual Route Cascaded Model of Visual Word Recognition


(Coltheart, Rastle, Perry, Langdon, & Ziegler, 2001)

Super Speed

CDP+ model


(Perry, Ziegler, & Zorzi, 2010)

Super Speed

Outcomes


Most lexical models with single node for semantics

• What has the structure of semantic representation be regarded?


Super Speed

Models of Semantic Representation


Semantic network model

Probabilistic topics model

Semantic space model

Source: Griffiths, Steyvers, & Tenenbaum (2007)

Super Speed

Semantic Featural model


(Smith, Shoben, & Rips, 1974)

Super Speed

Sense Model


(Finkbeiner, Forster, Nicol, Nakamura, 2004)

Larger number of activated ‘senses’ facilitates lexical processing.

Super Speed

Outcomes -undercultivation


Most lexical models with single node for semantics

• As what has the structure of semantic representation been regarded?

Most models with focus on inter-, not intra- lexical entry

Quantitative rather than qualitative difference postulated



Different approach: Where does meaning come from?

Meaning as a dynamic conglomerate of activated information

24

meaning Auditory information

Visual information

Olfactory information

Tactile information Gustatory

information

Kinetic information

Emotional information

Figure drawn based on Ikari (2009, p. 81)

Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August)

Chapter 2 – Emotion-Involved Processing


You cannot put into any schedule of general education

unless you succeed in exhibiting its relation to some essential

characteristic of all intelligent or emotional perception.

- Alfred North Whitehead (1916)

life

Dissociation of emotion and meaning: The case of L2

• Pavlenko (2012)

• L2 may be processed semantically but not emotionaly.

• Keysar et al. (2012)

• Emotional distance is farther in foreign language than L1.

• Yanase & Koizumi (2015)

• ELT in Japan tends to be emotion-less “Quotation Game.”

• What is emotional processing?


Characteristics of emotional processing compared to non-emotional cognitive processing

- Panksepp (2003)

i. the presence of experienced valence

ii. cortical sub-cortical locus of control

iii. precocious developmental trajectory

iv. organic, analog type nature

v. spontaneous, trans-cultural, bodily expressions

vi. involvement of both cerebral hemispheres


Emotion and learning: Neuroscientific evidences

• Role of amygdala in learning (LeDoux, 2007）

• Emotional prosody and emotional content facilitates activation of hippocampal gyrus. (McGaugh, 2003)

• Emotional stimuli facilitate connected activation of amygdala and hippocampus (Blakemore & Frith, 2005)

• Tendler & Wagner’s (2015) EEG study

• “Different emotions cause the brain to work differently, including in terms of cognitive processes such as learning and memory.”


Picture: http://brainmadesimple.com/amygdala.html

sk

Emotion-involved classroom practices • Vocabulary level

• Personal preferences and episodes (Hedge, 2000)

• Emotional attachment (Harmer, 2015)

• Impressive image (Thornbury, 2002)

• Methodology level – Humanistic Ap.

• Total Physical Response (Asher, 1969)

• Suggestopedia (Lozanov, 1978)

• Whole Brain Teaching (Biffle, 2013)


Proposition: Emotion-Involved Processing


/æpl/




[APPLE]

Shallo

w - D

eep


/æpl/




Shallo

w P

rocessin

g - Deep

Pro

cessing

[APPLE]


iv. Emotion-involved processing

My proposition

What has been said (e.g. Craik

and Turving, 1975)

Pedagogical application

♡

sk

Defining Emotion-Involved Processing (tentative)

• Emotion-involved processing is a ‘deeper’ version of semantic processing which does not only have (a)

to facilitate linguistic processing and retention more than mere semantic processing but also have (b) to invigorate learning process in a bottom-up direction.

• a promising key-concept for a successful L2 acquisition Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 31

sk

Related concepts to EIP

• Self-involved processing (Katz, 1987)

• Emotional valence and SIP (D'Argembeau, et al., 2005)

• Terminology

• Episodic organization

• Affective nature of episodic memory (Tulving, 1983)

• Relationship with creativity (Madore et al., in press)


sk

Newer view of emotion • Somatic Marker Hypothesis (Damasio, 1994)


body

mind ⊃ cognition

via emotion

Emotion as the ‘operating system’ of cognition • Ciompi’s (1997) Affect-logic:

= the psychological energy

- dynamism:

becomes meaningful information only via .

= fractal (deterministic chaos structure)


Perspectives – beyond lexical processing • EIP as a ‘flow’ experience

(Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).

• Autotelic process as a dissipative structure to ‘sail the chaos’ fruitfully

• Mindfulness

• Sustainable learning

• Creativity in learning

• Humanistic learning Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 35

(Csikszentmihalyi, 2007)

Chapter 3 – Experimental Study


“Argument is conclusive, but it does not remove doubt, so that the mind may rest in the sure knowledge of the truth,

unless it finds it by the method of experiment.”

- Roger Bacon

Situation

• Studies of emotionality in second language acquisition

• E.g. . . learning anxiety, motivation, etc.

⇒ approaches to emotion

• Fewer cases for approach to emotion

⇒ An scale for emotionality?


How can ‘emotion’ be measured? • View 1: Network theory of ‘basic emotions’

• E.g. Oatley & Johnson-Laird’s (1987) 5 archetypes

• View 2: Non-linear dynamic model (Scherer, 2009)

• View 3: Linear dimensional model (Bradley & Lang, 1994)


joy sadness

anger fear disgust

Emotional valence


Defining “Emotional Valence” • “Affective [i.e. Emotional] valence could be described

by bipolar scales that, in aggregate, defined a continuous dimension from pleasantness (happy, pleased, hopeful, etc.) to unpleasantness (unhappy, annoyed, despairing, etc.)”. (Bradley & Lang, 2000, p. 247)

• “The largest variance which accounts for emotions”

(Osgood et al., 1957)

• “Fundamental role in emotions” (Ortony et al., 1988)


positive neutral negative

ANEW Database (Bradley & Lang, 1999) • Affective norms for English words

• 1034 English words rated by native speakers

• Participants: English (L1) speakers

• Paper-based questionnaire with 9 point likart scale


Problem • No of

L2 lexical emotionality of JLE learners

↑ but it is. . .

Needed to investigate emotionality


Solution

• Making Japanese learners’ version of affective norms of English word

• “proto-JLE-ANEW” word list

• Focus on “valence”

• On-line data (reaction time recorded)


Evaluation – Experimental Method • Participants:

• Japanese learners of English (N = 32)

• Materials:

• 390 familiar English words which are listed both in (a) ANEW Database, and in (b) Lexical Familiarity Database of Japanese EFL Learners (Yokokawa, 2006)


Evaluation – Experimental Procedure • Task:

• Valence Judgment Task (4-point Likert scale)

• Procedure:

• Individual or dual experiment

• 390 Stimuli words presented via SuperLab® on a PC screen

• 39 trials x 10 blocks


1.love

2.joy

3.champion

4.friendly

・

・

・

・

・

・

203.bottle

204.grass

205.nurse

206.fish

・

・

・

・

・

・

397.sad

388.cancer

389.funeral

390.rape


Evaluation - Analysis • Statistics

• Pearson product-moment correlation

• L2 emotional valence ratings

• L2 emotional valence judgement reaction time

• L1 emotional valence ratings (Bradley & Lang, 1999)

• L1 frequency (BNC)

• L2 familiarity (Yokokawa, 2006)


Evaluation – Experimental Results

• Strong positive correlation (r = .92, p < .01) between L2 valence ratings and L1 valence ratings

• universality of emotional evaluation

• Weak positive correlation (r = .33, p < .01) between L2 valence ratings and L2 visual familiarity

• emotionality as an account for familiarity?

• U-shaped relationship between L2 valence ratings and reaction time

• processing advantage of emotion-laden words Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 48

U-Shaped Relationship between L2 Valence Ratings and Reaction Time


Limitations and Further Study • Limitations

• Number of participants

• Number of words

• Likart resolution

• Singularity of emotional dimension measured

• Further Study

• Making of extended JLE-ANEW database

• Investigating how emotional valence have an impact on L2 lexical memory (cf. Kanazawa, 2015b)


References • Alm, A. (2013). Extensive listening 2.0 with foreign language podcasts. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 7 (3),

266-280.

• Asher, J. (1969). The total physical response approach to second language learning. Modern Language Journal, 53, 133-139.

• Biffle, C. (2013). Whole brain teaching for challenging kids (and the rest of your class, too). Yucaipa, CA: Author.

• Blakemore, S. –J. and Frith, U. (2005). The learning brain: Lessons for education. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing Ltd.

• Bradley, M. M., and Lang, P. J. (1994). Measuring emotion: The self-assessment manikin and the semantic differential. Journal of Behavior Therapy and Experimental Psychology, 25 (1), 49-59.

• Bradley, M. M., and Lang, P. J. (1999). Affective norms for English words (ANEW): Instruction manual and affective ratings. Technical Report C-1, The Center for Research in Psychophysiology, University of Florida.

• Bradley, M. M., and Lang, P. J. (2000). Measuring emotion: Behavior, feeling, and physiology. In R. D. Lane and L. Nadel (Eds.), Cognitive neuroscience of emotion (pp. 242-276). New York: Oxford University Press.

• Ciompi, L. (1997). Die emotionalen Grundlagen des Denkens. Gottingen: Vandenhoeck & Reprecht.

• Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., and Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108 (1), 204-256.


References (cont.) • Craik, F. I. M. and Turving, E. (1975). Depth of processing and the retention of words in episodic memory. Journal of

Experimental Psychology, 104. 268-294.

• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper & Row.

• Damasio, A. R. (1994). Descartes' Error: Emotion, Reason, and the Human Brain. New York: Putnam Publishing.

• D'Argembeau, A., Comblain, C., and van der Linden, A. (2005). Affective valence and the self-reference effect: Influence of retrieval conditions, British Journal of Psychology, 96, 457-466.

• Finkbeiner, M., Forster, K.I., Nicol, J., Nakamura, K., (2004), The Role of Polysemy in Masked Semantic and Translation Priming. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 1-22.

• Griffiths, T. L., Steyvers, M., and Tenenbaum, J. B. (2007). Topics in semantic representation. Psychological Review, 114 (2), 211-244.

• Harmer, J. (2015). The practice of English language teaching (5th edition). London: Longman Handbooks for Language Teachers.

• Hedge, T. (2000). Teaching and learning in the language classroom. Oxford University Press.

• Ikari, Y. (2009). Ikita kotoba wo shutoku suru tameno eigokyoiku [English education for the acquisition of living language] (Doctoral dissertation). Osaka City Uniersity, Osaka.


References (cont.) • Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August). Emotional valence and L2 lexical processing: The making of L2 experimental word list for

Japanese learners of English. Paper presented at the sixth joint Foreign Language Education and Technology Conference (FLEAT-VI), Harvard University, Boston.

• Kanazawa, Y. (2015b, August). Emotional valence and L2 lexical recall memory: An experimental study with Japanese learners of English. Paper presented at the 55th National Convention of the Japan Association for Language Education & Technology, Senri Life Science Center, Osaka.

• Kadota, S. and Ikemura, D. (2006). Eigo goi shidou handbook [Handbook of English vocabulary instruction]. Tokyo: Taishukanshoten.

• Katz, A. N. (1987). Self-reference in the encoding of creative-relevant traits. Journal of Personality, 55 (1), 97-120.

• Keysar, B., Hayakawa, S., and An, S. (2012). The foreign-language effect: Thinking in a foreign tongue reduces decision biases. Psychological Science, 23, 661–668.

• LeDoux, J. (2007). The amygdala. Current Biology, 17 (20), R868-R874.

• Levelt, W. J. M. (1989). Speaking: From intention to articulation. Cambridge: MIT Press.

• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A. and Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-75.

• Lozanov, G. (1978). Suggestology and outlines of Suggestopedy. New York: Gordon & Breach.

• Madore, K. P., Addis, D. R., & Schacter, D. L. (in press). Creativity and Memory Effects of an Episodic-Specificity Induction on Divergent Thinking. Psychological Science. Kanazawa, Y. (2015a, August) 53

References (cont.) • McGaugh, J. L. (2003). Memory and emotion: The making of lasting memories. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.

• Mirzaii, M. (2012). Implicit vs explicit vocabulary learning: Which approach serves long-term recall better? 3L: The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 18 (2), 1-12.

• Morton, J. (1980). The logogen model and orthographic structure. In U. Frith (Ed.), Cognitive processes in spelling (pp. 117-134). London: Academic Press.

• Oatley, K. and Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1987). Towards a cognitive theory of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 1, 29-50.

• Ortony, A., Clore, G. I., and Collins, A. (1988). The cognitive structure of emotions. Cambridge University Press.

• Osgood, C., Suci, G., and Tannenbaum, P. (1957). The measurement of meaning. Urbana: University of Illinois.

• Panksepp, J. (2003). At the interface of the affective, bahavioral, and cognitive neurosciences：Decoding the emotional feelings of the brain. Brain and Cognition, 52, 4-14.

• Pavlenko, A. (2012). Affective processing in bilingual speakers: Disembodied cognition? International Journal of Psychology, 47 (6), 405-428.

• Perry, C., Ziegler, J. C., and Zorzi, M. (2010). Beyond single syllables: Large-scale modeling of reading aloud with the Connectionist Dual Process (CDP++) model. Cognitive Psychology, 61, 106-151.

• Pimsleur, P. (1967). A memory schedule. The Modern Language Journal, 51, 73-75.

• Saussure, F. D. (C. Bally and A. Sechehaye [Eds.]). (1916). Course in general linguistics.


References (cont.) • Scherer, K. R. (2009). Emotions are emergent processes: They require a dynamic computational architecture. Philosophical

Transactions of the Royal Society B, 364, 3459-3474.

• Seidenberg, M. S., and McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96 (4), 523-568.

• Smith, E. E., Shoben, E. J. and Rips, L. J. (1974). Structure and process in semantic memory: A featural model for semantic decisions, Psychological Review, 81 (3), 214-241.

• Tendler, A. and Wagner, S. (2015). Different types of theta rhythmicity are induced by social and fearful stimuli in a network associated with social memory. eLIFE, 4, 1-22.

• Thornbury, S. (2002). How to teach vocabulary. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited.

• Tulving, E. (1983). Elements of episodic memory. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

• Webb, S. (2007). The effects of repetition on vocabulary knowledge. Applied Linguistics, 28 (1), 46-65.

• Whitehead, A. N. (1929). The aims of education and other essays. New York: The Free Press.

• Yanase, Y., and Koizumi, K. (2015). Shougakkou karano eigokyouiku wo dousuruka [How should we do with elementary English language education]. Tokyo: Iwanami Booklet.

• Yokokawa, H. (2006). Nihonjin eigo gakushuusya no eitango shinmitsudo: Mojihen[English familiarity of Japanese English learners: Written word version]. Tokyo: Kuroshioshuppan.


Friday, August 14th 2015 1:25pm-1:50 (Lamont Forum Room) the sixth joint Foreign Language Education and Technology Conference Venue: Boston, Harvard University

Session No. 127

and L2 Lexical Processing: The Making of L2 Experimental Word List

for Japanese Learners of English

[FLEAT6] Emotional Valence and L2 Lexical Processing - The Making of L2 Experimental Word List for Japanese Learners of English

Education

semantic processing

processing chapter

models kanazawa

levels of processing

orthographical processing

weaver model kanazawa

cdp model kanazawa

l2 lexical processing