Investigating the Role of Multiple Intelligences in Determining Vocabulary Learning Strategies for L2 Learners

Mahsa Sistani and Mahmood Hashemian

English Language Teaching, 2016, vol. 9, issue 6, 242

Abstract: This study, first, examined whether there was any relationship between Iranian L2 learners’ vocabulary learning strategies (VLSs), on the one hand, and their multiple intelligences (MI) types, on the other hand. In so doing, it explored the extent to which MI would predict L2 learners’ VLSs. To these ends, 40 L2 learners from Isfahan University of Technology in Isfahan participated in the study, and the following instruments were utilized to collect the data- the Oxford Placement Test (OPT) to gauge participants’ proficiency level, the Multiple Intelligences Questionnaire (Mckenzie, 1999), and a vocabulary learning questionnaire based on the framework adopted from Schmitt’s (1990). The strategies were divided into five categories- determination, memory, social, metacognitive, and cognitive. To analyze the data, Pearson correlation was applied to find out the relationship between the participants’ intelligence categories and their preferred VLSs. Then, multiple regression analysis was run to indicate the significance of the specific VLSs in the participants’ intelligences. Results revealed that there was a strong positive relationship between participants’ intrapersonal intelligence and their tendency toward the cognitive and metacognitive strategies. Moreover, as participants’ scores in their interpersonal intelligence test increased, they inclined toward the social strategies more. A potential positive and significant relationship between visual/spatial intelligence and memory strategies and also linguistic intelligence and determination strategies was also found out. Overall results revealed that the participants made a significant difference regarding their decisions for particular VLSs, as intrapersonal, interpersonal, linguistic, and visual learners predicted more specific and significant VLSs in comparison with other types of intelligences.

Date: 2016
References: View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/download/60039/32142 (application/pdf)
https://ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/elt/article/view/60039 (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:ibn:eltjnl:v:9:y:2016:i:6:p:242

Access Statistics for this article

More articles in English Language Teaching from Canadian Center of Science and Education Contact information at EDIRC.
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Canadian Center of Science and Education ().