Japanese University Learners’Self-Initiated Dictionary Use
in EFL Reading
Tomoko Yabukoshi*
Toshiko Koyama**
Abstract
This study investigated the types of mobile devices language learners used as dictionaries in areading task and explored the relationship between learners’ dictionary choices on the one hand andtheir proficiency, look-up behavior, and reading comprehension on the other. Participants comprised
75 Japanese university students learning English as a foreign language, who were instructed toengage in a reading comprehension task. While reading, they were free to use their mobile devices
and were instructed to circle the looked-up words on the task sheet. After finishing the task, theyreported the types of mobile devices they had used, if any, and the time they spent on the task.
Analysis of the students’ responses revealed that smartphone-based dictionaries （i.e., Google
Translate and Weblio）were the most commonly used tools in the reading task. Further analysis
found no significant relationship between learners’ dictionary choices on the one hand and theirproficiency, the number of lookups, and reading comprehension on the other. Task completion timevaried depending on the presence or absence of dictionaries. These results were discussed relative
to the authors’ previous findings on a vocabulary task to provide insights into learners’ dictionary
use in various decoding tasks.
Keywords: m obile learning, dictionary apps, look-up behavior, reading comprehension, EFL learners
I. Introduction
Technology-enhanced second and foreign language（L2）learning has proliferated over the last
decade, and researchers have shown an increasing interest in the application of mobile devices, suchas smartphones in L2 teaching and learning（e.g., Ko, 2019; Rashid, Howard, Cunningham, & Watson,
2021）. As information technology has advanced, learners’ dictionaries have also evolved from paper
dictionaries to pocket electronic dictionaries （pocket E-dictionaries）, online dictionaries, and* Nihon University** Osaka Ohtani University
−1−

研究紀要

第 94 号

smartphone/tablet dictionary applications（apps）. The evolution of dictionaries is likely to have an
impact on learners’ preferences and patterns of dictionary use. Although pocket E-dictionaries gained
popularity about a decade ago, particularly among Asian English as a foreign language （EFL）
learners （Chen, 2010）, Hubert （2017） found that Japanese university students are increasingly
utilizing their smartphone as their primary dictionary resource. Although researchers have been
exploring the patterns and effects of pocket E-dictionary use（e.g., Chen, 2010; Koyama & Takeuchi,
2003, 2007）, investigations into smartphone-based dictionaries are scarce. Few studies have examinedthe differences in effects between smartphone dictionary apps and pocket E-dictionaries acrossdifferent L2 tasks. Furthermore, researchers have yet to extensively examine learners’ voluntary
dictionary use in real L2 learning settings, as opposed to experimental conditions. To address thesegaps, Koyama and Yabukoshi （2019a, 2019b） investigated Japanese college learners’ self-initiateddictionary use in a vocabulary task. The present study sought to learn more about these learners’
dictionary use in various L2 decoding tasks by exploring their voluntary dictionary use in a reading
comprehension task. As Prichard and Atkins （2021） suggested, L2 readers employ vocabulary
coping strategies（i.e., dictionary use, inferring meaning from context, ignoring unknown words）todeal with unknown lexica while reading.
II. Literature Review
1. Paper Dictionaries and Pocket E-Dictionaries
Empirical studies have been conducted on the use of paper dictionaries and pocket
E-dictionaries in experimental settings, where learners were often assigned to one of the dictionarygroups （i.e., paper dictionary group, pocket E-dictionary group, or no-dictionary group） andinstructed to use specific dictionaries while engaging in L2 learning tasks. One of the earliest
empirical studies is Luppescu and Day（1993）, who suggested the complex processes of bilingual
dictionary use while reading a short story. The participants were Japanese university EFL students
who were assigned to either a dictionary or no-dictionary group. The findings demonstrated that thedictionary group marked significantly higher scores on a vocabulary test than the no-dictionarygroup, suggesting that the use of a dictionary while reading could improve “indirect or incidental
vocabulary learning” （Luppescu & Day, 1993, p. 271）
. Regarding reading comprehension, theresearchers claimed that the use of dictionaries might help learners clarify the meaning of a wordthat could not be inferred completely from the context and comprehend reading texts. However, thestudy also found negative aspects of dictionary use, as the dictionary group took nearly twice as longas the no-dictionary group to read the story and had lower reading speed. The researchers claimed−2−

Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Readingthat “the use of a dictionary in some cases may be misleading or confusing,” if students are unable tolocate the appropriate meaning from the large number of dictionary entries（Luppescu & Day, 1993,
p. 273）.
Koyama and Takeuchi（2003）conducted one of the first contrastive studies by comparing theuse of paper dictionaries to that of pocket E-dictionaries. An experiment involving Japanese highschool EFL students found that the pocket E-dictionary group tended to look up more words thanthe paper dictionary group did when reading an English text, but also found no significant
differences in search time and rates of recall and recognition of the words searched between the twogroups. In another experimental study, Koyama and Takeuchi（2007）investigated Japanese college
EFL learners’ dictionary use while reading. The findings indicate that pocket E-dictionaries are likely
to enhance learners’ look-up frequency and shorten the time to complete the reading task relative topaper dictionaries. However, the study found no significant difference in reading scores between thetwo dictionary groups. The results of Koyama and Takeuchi（2003, 2007）suggest that learners’ lookup frequency may not be proportional to their search time, word retention, or degree of reading
comprehension. Similarly, Chen（2010）conducted an experimental study with Chinese college EFL
students and compared the effects of paper dictionaries and pocket E-dictionaries on English
vocabulary acquisition. The study found no significant differences in word comprehension, production
and retention test scores between the two dictionary groups, although the pocket E-dictionary group
showed significantly less time used for task completion than the paper dictionary group. Overall,such previous studies showed that pocket E-dictionary users did not display greater reading
comprehension and vocabulary acquisition, despite their higher look-up frequency and/or quicker
task completion relative to paper dictionary users.
2. Mobile Devices as Dictionaries
In todays’ advanced information society, L2 learners have easy access to mobile devices, suchas smartphones and tablet computers, with relatively high-quality wireless Internet connections.
Along with the extensive permeation of the Internet and mobile technology, dictionary use among
university students appears to be changing significantly. Collins（2016）examined Japanese college
EFL students’ usage of dictionaries inside and outside the classroom using a questionnaire andfollow-up interviews. The results showed that the smartphone-based dictionary was the mostfrequently used dictionary type in both learning contexts, followed by the E-dictionary. Collins
argued that Japanese university EFL students are “in a transitional phase,” moving away from
E-dictionaries（p. 46）. More recently, Ma（2019）conducted a survey with Hong Kong university L2students, focusing on their use of mobile dictionary apps. The analyses of the questionnaire responses
−3−

研究紀要

第 94 号

showed that most of the students （91％） installed one or more dictionary apps on their mobile
devices. Based on the high rate of dictionary app installation, Ma suggests that mobile dictionary
apps have become a learning tool frequently used by L2 learners.
The questionnaire surveys reviewed above have provided a general picture of learners’
dictionary choices in L2 learning. However, these surveys examined learners’ dictionary use ingeneral rather than for specific language tasks. Furthermore, they did not report on learners’ actualuse of dictionaries but on their perceptions of dictionary use. To fill these gaps, Koyama（2019）
investigated learners’ actual use of mobile dictionary apps. The study compared Japanese college
EFL learners’ use of a smartphone dictionary and their use of a tablet dictionary in word definition
and reading comprehension tasks. Comparing the time and scores of the two types of devices using
the same dictionary apps, she found that, while the learners looked up more words when using atablet dictionary, they marked higher scores on the reading comprehension task and showed ahigher rate of word retention when using a smartphone dictionary. Koyama argued that, while adifferent dictionary interface（i.e., different screen sizes）may influence learners’ look-up frequency, alarger number of lookups may not contribute to better L2 learning outcomes.
A review of the literature suggests that L2 learners have increasingly used smartphones as
dictionaries. However, few studies have compared effects between smartphone dictionary apps andother dictionaries （i.e., pocket E-dictionaries） across different L2 tasks. Furthermore, researchers
have yet to extensively examine learners’ self-initiated dictionary use in real L2 learning settings, as
opposed to experimental conditions. As suggested by Collins（2016, p. 36）, “in the age of free online
dictionaries,” learners have a variety of options, including E-dictionaries, online dictionaries, andsmartphone dictionary apps. Learners’ dictionary use might change as dictionary technology evolves.
Thus, we need to update our understanding of the types of dictionary technology L2 learners
actually and voluntarily select to use in this technological era.
3. Self-Initiated Use of Mobile Devices as Dictionaries
Koyama and Yabukoshi （2019a, 2019b） investigated Japanese college EFL learners’ selfinitiated dictionary use in a vocabulary task over two years. Koyama and Yabukoshi （2019b）
conducted a pilot study with 98 freshmen in the 2017 academic year. A replication study was thenundertaken by Koyama and Yabukoshi（2019a）with 73 freshmen in the 2018 academic year. The
participants of the two studies were comparable in terms of their educational backgrounds （i.e.,
academic year, major, EFL proficiency）. The vocabulary task consisted of 15 items that wereretrieved from Part 5（incomplete sentences）of an official TOEIC® Listening & Reading Preparation
Workbook. The participants were free to use their mobile devices （i.e., smartphones, pocket−4−Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Reading

E-dictionaries, tablets）to answer the quiz. They were instructed to circle the looked-up words on
the task sheet during the task. After finishing the task, they reported the types of mobile devices
and the names of the dictionaries they had used, if any. Koyama and Yabukoshi （2019a） also
examined the time the participants spent on the vocabulary task. The findings of the two studies
showed that:（1）the most of the students（approximately 80％）chose to use smartphone-based
dictionaries, such as Weblio and Google Translate, to look up unknown words in the vocabulary task;（2）the use of pocket E-dictionaries became less popular, with its proportion dropping from 18.4％ to9.6％ of the participants in each study over two years; and（3）the students increasingly chose not touse dictionaries in the vocabulary task, with this proportion increasing from 5.1％ to 9.6％ of thestudents over two years. Further analyses revealed that:（a）there seemed to be no relationshipbetween students’ dictionary choices and their English proficiency levels;（b）the number of lookups
differed significantly in terms of the students’ dictionary choices, with the pocket E-dictionary users
looking up more words than the smartphone dictionary users in the task; but（c）no significant
differences were observed either in the time taken to complete the task or in the vocabulary testscores between the smartphone, pocket E-dictionary, and no-dictionary user groups.1
To gain further insights into learners’ self-initiated dictionary use in various L2 decoding tasks,
the current study turned to investigate Japanese college EFL learners’ choices and use of dictionaries
in a reading comprehension task.
III. Methodology
1. Research Objectives
This study aimed to（a）investigate the types of mobile devices Japanese university EFL
learners voluntarily use as dictionaries when they encounter unknown words while reading English
passages and（b）explore the relationship between learners’ dictionary choices on the one hand andtheir proficiency, look-up behavior, and reading comprehension on the other. The study addressed
the following research questions（RQs）:
RQ1. What kinds of mobile devices and dictionaries/dictionary apps do Japanese college EFL
learners voluntarily use to look up unknown words in a reading comprehension task?
RQ2. Is there any relationship between learners’ dictionary choices and English proficiency
levels?

−5−

研究紀要

第 94 号

RQ3. Does look-up behavior（i.e., look-up frequency and task completion time）differ according
to learners’ dictionary choices?
RQ4. Do reading comprehension scores differ according to learners’ dictionary choices?
The results of the study will be discussed relative to the authors’ previous findings on a vocabularytask（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）to provide insights into learners’ dictionary use accordingto L2 task type.
2. Participants
Overall, 75 undergraduate students（37 men and 38 women）participated in the study. They
were all freshmen, aged around 18 to 19 years, majoring in health and sports at a university inwestern Japan. They were enrolled in a compulsory English reading and writing course and had
been learning English in formal settings for over six years. Their English proficiency levels ranged
from false beginner to intermediate EFL learner, based on 45-item pre-class cloze test scores（M =18.40, SD = 4.26）. They were comparable to the participants of the authors’ previous studies（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）in terms of their educational backgrounds（i.e., academic year,
major, EFL proficiency）.2
3. Procedures and Materials
The participants’ self-initiated dictionary use was investigated in the English reading andwriting class at the beginning of a semester in the 2019 academic year. Each participant was given a
reading comprehension task drawn from Part 7（Reading Comprehension）of an official TOEIC®
Listening & Reading Preparation Workbook（Educational Testing Service, 2016）. The participants
were instructed to read five passages（i.e., an advertisement, e-mail, report, notice, text message
chain）and answer 14 multiple-choice questions. Each passage included two to five questions. Thesematerials were reviewed by their English teacher, and she confirmed that the materials were likely
to contain several words and phrases that were unknown or unfamiliar to the participants.
During the reading task, the participants were free to use their mobile devices （i.e.,
smartphones, tablets, pocket E-dictionaries）to look up unknown words and phrases. The choices anduse of devices and dictionaries were left to each individual. Thus, the participants spontaneously
consulted dictionaries to comprehend the texts and answer the questions. They were instructed tocircle the looked-up words on the reading task sheet. After finishing the task, they were asked toreport on the types of mobile devices and the names of the dictionaries/dictionary apps they had−6−Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Reading

used, if any, at the bottom of the task sheet. There was no time limit for performing the reading task.
The participants were told to take as much time as they needed to read the passages and answer
the questions. They reported on the time when they had started to read and the time when they
had finished the task on the task sheet.
4. Data Analyses
To address RQ 1, the 75 task sheet answers were examined to identify the types of mobile
devices and names of the dictionaries/dictionary apps they had utilized during the reading task. To
address RQs 2, 3, and 4, the study focused on the use of major smartphone dictionary apps andpocket E-dictionaries. The study also examined those who chose not to use dictionaries. A total of 56
students’ dictionary use was analyzed. They were assigned to the Google Translate Group（n = 25）
if they had used Google Translate on a smartphone, the Weblio Group（n = 15）if they had used
Weblio on a smartphone, the Pocket E-Dictionary Group（n = 4）if they had mainly used a pocket
E-dictionary, or the No-Dictionary Group （n = 12） if they had not used any dictionary. These
dictionary groups were also investigated in the authors’ previous studies（Koyama & Yabukoshi,
2019a, 2019b）. 19 students were excluded from the data analyses: 15 of them did not properly markthe words they had looked up on the task sheet, two of them reported using only minor smartphone
dictionary apps （i.e., LINE, ALC Eijirō）, one of them reported using both Google Translate andWeblio, and one of them reported using Google Search without mentioning the specific websites he/she had consulted.
The study examined four variables:（a）English proficiency assessed by the 45-item pre-classcloze test,（b）the number of lookups marked on the reading task sheet,（c）the time spent on thetask reported on the task sheet, and（d）reading comprehension measured using the reading task of
the TOEIC Part 7. Each variable was examined in terms of learners’ dictionary groups. Due to thesmall and unbalanced sample sizes of the four dictionary groups, a Kruskal–Wallis test, a nonparametric method for comparing three or more groups of median values, was performed todetermine if there were significant differences in these test scores and look-up behavior between thefour dictionary groups. The tests were followed by post-hoc testing using Mann–Whitney U tests
with Bonferroni corrections.
IV. Results
1. Mobile Devices and Dictionaries
Tables 1 and 2 show the types of mobile devices and the names of dictionaries/dictionary
−7−

研究紀要

第 94 号

apps reported by the participants in the reading task. As shown in Table 1, most participants（78.9％）chose to use smartphones as dictionaries. Among the various smartphone dictionary apps,
Google Translate and Weblio were particularly popular （Table 2）. These two apps are free
dictionary/translation applications available in both web-based and offline versions. Google Search
was the third most popular tool: 15 students reported using it in the reading task. Only four
participants（5.3％）reported using pocket E-dictionaries in the reading task. Finally, 12 students（15.8％）chose not to use any dictionaries in the reading task.
Table 1. Number and Percentage of Mobile Devices Used
Mobile Devicen％Smartphones

60

78.9

Pocket E-dictionaries

4

5.3

No dictionaries

12

15.8

Total

76a

100

a

One student reported using a smartphone and a pocket E-dictionary.

Table 2. Number of Dictionaries/Dictionary Apps Used
Mobile Device

Dictionary/Dictionary appnSmartphones

Google Translate

32

Weblio23

Google Search

15

LINE

3

Yahoo

1

ALC Eijirō

1Genius Dictionary

2

Othersa2

Pocket E-dictionaries

Note. Multiple answers were allowed.
aOthers include Wisdom English-Japanese Dictionary and an unknown dictionary.

2. English Proficiency
The study further examined learners’ English proficiency in terms of their dictionary choices,focusing on four dictionary groups （i.e., Google Translate, Weblio, Pocket E-Dictionary, NoDictionary）. According to Table 3, the No-Dictionary group scored slightly higher on the cloze test
than the other three dictionary groups. However, the result of the Kruskal–Wallis test did notsuggest any significant difference in cloze test scores between the four dictionary groups（H（3）=.
5.94, p = .12）

−8−

Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Reading

Table 3. Cloze Test Scores of Four Dictionary Groups
Group

n

M

SD

MedianGoogle Translate

25

17.56

4.45

18.00

Weblio

15

19.47

2.97

20.00

Pocket E-Dictionary

4

18.25

3.50

18.50

No-Dictionary

12

20.83

3.49

21.50

All

56

18.82

3.96

20.00

Note. Maximum score of the cloze test is 45.

3. Look-up Behavior
3.1 Lookups
The participants’ look-up behavior（i.e., number of lookups and time required to complete thetask）was examined in terms of their dictionary choices. Table 4 lists the number of words consulted
by the three dictionary groups. The Google Translate group looked up more words than the othertwo dictionary groups. However, these differences were not statistically significant. The Kruskal–
Wallis test showed no significant difference in the number of lookups between the three groups（H（2）= 2.11, p = .35）.
Table 4. Number of Lookups of Three Dictionary Groups
Group

n

M

Google Translate

25

11.00

8.19

8.00

Weblio

15

9.00

9.56

6.00

Pocket E-Dictionary

4

6.75

5.56

4.50

All

44

9.93

8.44

7.00

SD

Median

3.2 Time Required to Complete the Task
Table 5 shows the time spent on the reading task by the four dictionary groups. As shown in
the table, the No-Dictionary group took less time to complete the task than the other three dictionarygroups. The result of the Kruskal–Wallis test showed a significant difference in task completion time
between the four dictionary groups（H（3）= 8.66, p = .03）.The post-hoc Mann–Whitney U tests with
Bonferroni corrections（corrected p value: .05/3 = .016）did not show significant differences between
any two groups. The results showed no significant difference between the No-Dictionary and Pocket
E-Dictionary groups（U = 5.00, p = .021）, with a large effect size（r = .58）
, between the No-Dictionary
and Weblio groups（U = 49.50, p = .047）, with a medium effect size（r = .38）, or between the NoDictionary and Google Translate groups（U = 87.00, p = .040）, with a medium effect size（r = .34）.
However, given the medium to large effect sizes, the No-Dictionary group was likely to complete the
−9−

研究紀要

第 94 号

reading task sooner than the other three dictionary groups, particularly the Pocket E-dictionarygroup.
Table 5. Time Required to Complete the Tasks of Four Dictionary Groups
Group

n

M

SD

MedianGoogle Translate

25

34.48

6.51

37.00

Weblio

15

35.20

5.21

34.00

Pocket E-Dictionary

4

40.00

4.16

40.00

No-Dictionary

12

28.92

8.44

30.00

All

56

33.88

7.02

35.00

4. Reading Comprehension
Table 6 presents the reading comprehension scores of the four dictionary groups measured by
the TOEIC Part 7 task. The result of the Kruskal–Wallis test showed no significant difference inreading test scores between the four groups（H（3）= 2.94, p = .40）.
Table 6. Reading Test Scores of Four Dictionary Groups
Group

n

M

SD

MedianGoogle Translate

25

7.72

2.44

8.00
9.00

Weblio

15

9.00

2.67

Pocket E-Dictionary

4

8.75

0.96

8.50

No-Dictionary

12

7.92

1.68

8.50

All

56

8.18

2.31

8.00

Note. Maximum score of the reading test is 14.

V. Discussion
This study investigated Japanese college EFL learners’ self-initiated dictionary use in areading comprehension task drawn from the TOEIC Part 7. The results will be discussed in relation
to those obtained in the authors’ previous studies on learners’ dictionary use in a vocabulary taskdrawn from the TOEIC Part 5（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）. This study’s participants andthose of the earlier studies were comparable in terms of their educational backgrounds（i.e., academic
year, major, EFL proficiency）.
1. Learners’Dictionary Choices
The current study found that smartphone-based dictionaries were used extensively by many
participants （78.9％） in the reading comprehension task. That high proportion is similar to the− 10 −

Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Reading

results of the authors’ previous studies on the vocabulary task. The percentage of smartphone
dictionary users was 80.8％ in Koyama and Yabukoshi（2019a）and 75.5％ in Koyama and Yabukoshi（2019b）. These findings indicate that Japanese college students tend to use smartphone devices as
dictionaries in their EFL learning, as suggested by Collins（2016）and Hubert（2017）. Regarding
smartphone dictionary apps, while the authors’ previous studies reported that Weblio was the mostpopular dictionary app for the vocabulary task（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）, the present
study found that Google Translate was the most commonly used tool in the reading task. Weblio
appears to provide more detailed features of target words （i.e., word definitions, phonetictranscriptions, word classes, examples）than does Google Translate, which typically provides word,phrase, and sentence translation as well as a pronunciation guide. The students of the present study
might have chosen Google Translate to simply look up the meanings of unknown words in the
TOEIC Part 7 reading task. On the other hand, the students involved in the previous studies might
have chosen Weblio rather than Google Translate in order to obtain other information in addition to
the meanings of the target words （i.e., word classes, idioms） to complete the TOEIC Part 5
vocabulary task.
This study found that only a few students（5.3％）reported using pocket E-dictionaries in thereading task. This proportion of pocket E-dictionary users is lower than what was found in theauthors’ previous studies. Koyama and Yabukoshi（2019a）reported that 9.6％ of the students utilized
pocket E-dictionaries in the vocabulary task in the 2018 academic year, and Koyama and Yabukoshi（2019b）reported that 18.4％ used them in the 2017 academic year. Moreover, the present study
found that 15.8％ of the students did not utilize any dictionaries in the reading task. This proportionis larger than what was found in the authors’ previous studies; 9.6％ of the students reported notusing any dictionaries in the vocabulary task in the 2018 academic year（Koyama & Yabukoshi,
2019a）, and only 5.1％ reported not using them in the 2017 academic year（Koyama & Yabukoshi,
2019b）. This difference might occur because some students may have managed to infer the meaningof unknown words in the reading passage of the TOEIC Part 7 task, which provides richer
contextual information than do the single sentences of the TOEIC Part 5 task.
2. Proficiency, Look-up Behavior, and Learning Outcomes
The current study explored the relationship between learners’ dictionary choices in thereading task on the one hand and their proficiency levels, look-up behavior, and reading
comprehension on the other. The results showed that the cloze test scores did not differ significantly
between the four dictionary groups （i.e., Google Translate, Weblio, Pocket E-dictionary, and NoDictionary）. These findings are in line with those of the authors’ previous studies on vocabulary− 11 −

研究紀要

第 94 号

tasks（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）. Thus, it seems that there is no relationship between
learners’ dictionary choices in such L2 decoding tasks and their English proficiency levels.
The present study also investigated learners’ look-up behaviors in the reading task. The study
found no significant difference in number of lookups between the three dictionary groups（i.e., Google
Translate, Weblio, and Pocket E-dictionary）. These findings differ from the authors’ previous studies,
which found that the E-dictionary group consulted dictionaries more frequently than the other two
smartphone groups in the vocabulary task （Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）. More in-depth
analyses revealed that this study’s Pocket E-dictionary group looked up much fewer words in thereading task（M = 6.75, SD = 5.56, n = 4）than it had in the previous studies on the vocabulary task
（M = 33.57, SD = 10.94, n = 7 in Koyama and Yabukoshi［2019a］; M = 32.83, SD = 22.52, n = 18 inKoyama and Yabukoshi［2019b］）. The differences in findings between the current study and theprevious studies may be due to task differences, as discussed in Section V.1. It appears that some ofthis study’s participants may have worked out the meanings of unknown words contextually in the
TOEIC Part 7 reading task and thus managed to answer the reading comprehension questions
without looking up every single unknown word in a dictionary. By contrast, the TOEIC Part 5
vocabulary task generally requires learners to understand several information of the target words（i.e., definitions, word classes, idioms） more precisely with less contextual information than the
TOEIC Part 7 reading task does. Such task differences may have induced different look-up
frequencies in these two tasks. Another possible factor is the small sample size of the Pocket
E-dictionary groups, particularly in the present study （n = 4）. The lopsided focus on particular
individuals might have affected the studies’ results.
The time spent on the reading task was also examined as a look-up behavior in this study.
The results indicate a significant difference in time between the four dictionary groups（i.e., Google
Translate, Weblio, Pocket E-dictionary, and No-Dictionary）. The No-Dictionary group completed thereading task more quickly than the other three dictionary groups, although this difference was notstatistically significant. Luppescu and Day（1993）found that a dictionary group took longer to read astory than a group that did not use dictionaries. The researchers argued that the use of dictionaries
while reading may be confusing in some cases with a large number of entries under the headword,
which will reduce reading speed. On the other hand, the findings of the present study are notconsistent with those of the authors’ previous study（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a）, which found no
significant difference in the time used for the vocabulary task between the four dictionary groups.
This discrepancy could be explained in terms of task differences again. While the vocabulary task of
the TOEIC Part 5 requires learners to read each single short sentence and choose an appropriate
word or phrase to complete the sentence, the reading task of the TOEIC Part 7 requires learners to− 12 −

Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Reading

read a variety of passages, rather than a single sentence, and locate the part that is relevant to eachcomprehension question. It appears that finding suitable definitions may take longer for people
reading long passages than it does for people reading single sentences. Such task differences could
have affected the participants’ search times, leading to the inconsistent results between the twostudies.
Despite the differences in the time spent on the task, the learning outcomes measured by thereading task did not differ in terms of learners’ dictionary choices. Although the three dictionarygroups（i.e., Google Translate, Weblio, and Pocket E-dictionary）looked up unknown words and took
more time to finish the task, their scores on the reading comprehension test were not significantly
higher than those of the No-Dictionary group. These results agree with the authors’ previous studies
on the vocabulary task（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）, which found no significant differences
in vocabulary test scores between the dictionary groups, which varied in their look-up frequencies.
Similarly, Koyama and Takeuchi（2007）reported that, although the pocket E-dictionary group looked
up more words in a shorter period of time than the printed dictionary group, reading comprehensionof the text did not differ between the two groups. Therefore, L2 learning outcomes may not vary
according to learners’ dictionary choices and look-up behavior, such as the number of lookups andtime spent on a task. With reference to Koyama and Takeuchi’s（2009）qualitative findings, Koyama
and Yabukoshi（2019b）argued that strategies for dictionary use（i.e., guessing meaning from thecontext before actual lookups, checking usage examples of the target word）may affect learning
outcomes. Prichard and Atkins’ （2021） eye-tracking study also demonstrated that L2 readers
employed various strategies to cope with a lack of receptive vocabulary when encountering
unknown words. These strategies include not only dictionary use but also inferring meaning fromthe context and ignoring unknown words that are irrelevant to the reading task. These insights
warrant more in-depth investigation into L2 learners’ dictionary use to clarify the links between
dictionary use, L2 proficiency, and learning outcomes in L2 learning tasks.
VI. Conclusion
The present study investigated Japanese college EFL learners’ self-initiated dictionary use ina reading task and explored the relationship between their dictionary choices on the one hand andtheir look-up behavior and English test scores on the other. The difference across the dictionarygroups’ sample sizes is one of the methodological limitations of the study. Due to this imbalance, anonparametric procedure（i.e., Kruskal–Wallis test）was used for the data analyses, which is lessrobust than a parametric one（i.e., one-way independent ANOVA）. However, the use and choice of− 13 −

研究紀要

第 94 号

dictionaries were left to the individual learners in the current study. The unbalanced sample size isthus likely to reflect Japanese EFL college learners’ real learning situation, in which most students
use their smartphone as a dictionary. A comparison between this study’s findings and those of theauthors’ previous studies（Koyama & Yabukoshi, 2019a, 2019b）suggested that learners’ dictionary
choices and look-up behavior are likely to be affected by task differences. However, the studies
produced virtually identical findings on L2 learning outcomes, suggesting that they（i.e., reading andvocabulary test scores）may not vary according to learners’ dictionary choices as well as look-up
behavior（i.e., number of lookups, time spent on a task）. These findings have important implications
for researchers, instructors, and learners. Researchers should conduct a more in-depth exploration
into individual’s look-up behavior to elucidate the factors contributing to better learning outcomesand effective dictionary use, and thus more successful EFL learning. In particular, the use ofsmartphones as dictionaries warrants further investigation, given their popularity among EFL
learners. Moreover, not only researchers but also EFL instructors should develop a better
understanding of the effective use of smartphones as dictionaries for EFL learning and consider how
to incorporate such mobile devices inside and outside the classroom. Offering pedagogical guidanceon the effective use of mobile devices as dictionaries may provide EFL learners with a more positive
learning experience and allow them to learn English more efficiently and autonomously.
Acknowledgements
This study was partially supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research （C）
No.19K00777, awarded to the authors of this article for the 2019–2022 fiscal years.
Notes＊

This is a revised version of the paper presented at the 3rd JAAL in JACET Conference held on
December 5, 2020.

1.

No-dictionary users’ test scores were not examined in Koyama and Yabukoshi’s（2019b）pilot
study.

2.

The results of one-way independent ANOVA indicated that there was no significant differencein the cloze test scores between the participants of the current study and those of the authors’previous studies（F（2, 244）= .72, p = .49, η2= .01）.

− 14 −

Japanese University Learners’ Self-Initiated Dictionary Use in EFL Reading

References
Chen, Y.（2010）. Dictionary use and EFL learning. A contrastive study of pocket electronic dictionaries and paper
dictionaries. International Journal of Lexicography, 23（3）,275–306. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/ecq013
Collins, J. B.（2016）.Changes in electronic dictionary usage patters in the age of free online dictionaries: Implications forvocabulary acquisition. APU Journal of Language Research, 1, 36–49. http://hdl.handle.net/10367/7606
Educational Testing Service. （2016）. READING TEST PART 7. In TOEIC ® test koushikimondaishu:
Shinkeishikimondaitaiouhen［The official TOEIC® test workbook: For the new item types］. Tokyo: The Institutefor International Business Communication.
Hubert, R. P.（2017）. The use of smartphones as English dictionaries by university students in Japan and China. Acta
Humanistica et Scientifica Universitatis Sangio Kyotiensis, 50, 367–383. http://hdl.handle.net/10965/00002481
Ko, M.-H. （2019）. Students’ reactions to using smartphones and social media for vocabulary feedback. Computer
Assisted Language Learning, 32（8）,920–944. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1541360
Koyama, T.（2019）. What is the desirable dictionary interface to EFL learners? In D. Barr, E. Bañados, & A. Gimeno（Eds.）,WorldCALL 2018 Conference Proceedings（pp. 58–60）.Concepción, Chile: Universidad de Concepción.
Koyama, T., & Takeuchi, O.（2003）. Printed dictionaries vs. electronic dictionaries: A pilot study on how Japanese EFL
learners diﬀer in using dictionaries. Language Education & Technology, 40, 61–79. https://doi.org/10.24539/
let.40.0_61
Koyama, T., & Takeuchi, O. （2007）. Does look-up frequency help reading comprehension of EFL learners? Twoempirical studies of electronic dictionaries. CALICO Journal, 25（1）, 110–125. https://doi.org/10.1558/cj.v25i1.110–
125
Koyama, T., & Takeuchi, O.（2009）. How eﬀectively do good language learners use handheld electronic dictionaries: A
qualitative approach. Language Education and Technology, 46, 131–150. https://doi.org/10.24539/let.46.0_131
Koyama, T., & Yabukoshi, T. （2019a）. Examining the contributions of using dictionaries. The 7th International
Conference on Foreign Language Education and Technology（FLEAT）,Program Book. 23.
Koyama, T., & Yabukoshi, T.（2019b）.University L2 learners’dictionary use in multiple-choice vocabulary quiz: A pilot
study. The Bulletin of Education, Osaka Ohtani University, 45, 17–27.
Luppescu, S., & Day, R. R.（1993）. Reading, dictionaries, and vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 43（2）, 263–287.
https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-1770.1992.tb00717.x
Ma, Q.（2019）. University L2 learners’voices and experience in making use of dictionary apps in mobile assisted
language learning（MALL）. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 9（4）,
18–36. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.2019100102
Prichard, C., & Atkins, A.（2021）. Evaluating the vocabulary coping strategies of L2 readers: An eye tracking study.
TESOL Quarterly, 55（2）,593–620. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.3005
Rashid, S., Howard, J., Cunningham, U., & Watson, K. （2021）. Learner training in MALL: A Pakistani case study.
Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 15（2）,181–194. https://doi.org/10.1080/17501229.2020.1737076− 15 −