MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4412191448 · doi:10.5430/wjel.v15n8p55

Mitigating Lexical Attrition in Saudi EFL Learners: The Role of Digital Practices and Bilingual Contexts

2025· article· en· W4412191448 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Abdullah Al Fraidan, Ali Alaamri

Bibliographic record

VenueWorld Journal of English Language · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSecond Language Acquisition and Learning
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAttritionComputer scienceMathematics educationLinguisticsNatural language processingPsychologyMedicinePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines lexical attrition among Saudi secondary school English as a Foreign Language learners. Lexical attrition refers to the gradual loss of previously acquired vocabulary due to factors such as code-switching, infrequent usage, and reliance on L1-dominant communication. Using preliminary survey data and contemporary literature, the research explores cognitive and behavioral factors contributing to vocabulary erosion among digitally active adolescents. Findings indicate that excessive reliance on translation tools, frequent alternation between languages on social media, and passive engagement with visually dominated content such as video games and infographics significantly hinder vocabulary retention. Conversely, learners who actively produce English digital content, use spaced repetition techniques, and participate in structured peer interactions show substantially better long-term vocabulary retention. The study provides evidence-based recommendations for educators, including the integration of gamified learning technologies, promoting bilingual journaling, and fostering English-speaking environments both inside and outside the classroom. This research contributes to the existing literature on second language (L2) vocabulary attrition by highlighting practical strategies to sustain lexical competence among high school learners in bilingual, digitally enriched contexts.

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.505
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.327
Teacher spread0.313 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueWorld Journal of English LanguageSame topicSecond Language Acquisition and LearningFrench-language works237,207