INCIDENTAL ACQUISITION OF MULTIWORD EXPRESSIONS THROUGH AUDIOVISUAL MATERIALS
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract There has been limited research on the efficacy of captioned second language (L2) television in facilitating the incidental acquisition of multiword expressions (MWEs). The present study aims to fill this gap. Additionally, this study examines the role of typographic enhancement and repetition. One-hundred and twenty-two L2 learners were assigned to one of six conditions that differed in terms of caption condition (no captions, normal captions, enhanced captions) and the number of times they watched the same video (once, twice). The participants took a cued MWE form recall test before watching the video, immediately and 2 weeks after watching it. A content comprehension test was also administered. Compared to single viewing, repetition resulted in better content comprehension as well as better acquisition of MWEs. Both caption types positively influenced MWE recall relative to watching the video without captions, but typographic enhancement reduced the benefits of captions for content comprehension.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it