[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-425031-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":81,"doc-detail-425031-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":74,"head_meta":76,"extra_data":78,"updated_unix":80},105,"en","comparative-analysis-of-mobile-applications-and-traditional-methods-in-vocabulary-acquisition-review-article","Comparative Analysis of Mobile Applications and Traditional Methods in Vocabulary Acquisition - Review Article","","This study provides a comparative review of mobile applications and traditional classroom methods for English vocabulary acquisition among ESL learners. It examines whether mobile-assisted vocabulary learning improves retention, engagement, and productive vocabulary use, and identifies theories underlying each approach. A narrative literature review analyzes peer-reviewed studies from 2018–2025 with inclusion criteria focused on comparisons between MAVL and traditional methods. Results suggest stronger retention and engagement from mobile tools, while traditional instruction remains effective for productive, context-driven skills.",{"@graph":14,"@context":73},[15,34,56],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/literature/","Literature",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/comparative-analysis-of-mobile-applications-and-traditional-methods-in-vocabulary-acquisition-review-article/425031/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/comparative-analysis-of-mobile-applications-and-traditional-methods-in-vocabulary-acquisition-review-article/425031.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"Bintang","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-31","2026-09-28",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":55},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",10,{"@type":57,"mainEntity":58},"FAQPage",[59,65,69],{"name":60,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":62},"What is the main goal of this review article?","Question",{"text":63,"@type":64},"It compares mobile applications and traditional classroom methods for English vocabulary acquisition and evaluates whether mobile-assisted vocabulary learning improves retention, engagement, and productive vocabulary use.","Answer",{"name":66,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":67},"How were studies selected and analyzed?",{"text":68,"@type":64},"Peer-reviewed articles published between 2018 and 2025 were retrieved from databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar, then synthesized using thematic analysis under strict inclusion/exclusion criteria.",{"name":70,"@type":61,"acceptedAnswer":71},"What do the findings suggest about mobile apps versus traditional methods?",{"text":72,"@type":64},"Mobile applications often support superior vocabulary retention and learner engagement due to multimedia features, spaced repetition, and gamification, while traditional methods remain strong for productive vocabulary skills through contextual and teacher-mediated instruction.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":75,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":77,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":79,"site_id":7},425031,1790815596,{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":83},"success",[84,88,91,95,100,105,110,115,120,123,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":85,"show_sort_weight":86,"slug":87},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":112,"show_sort_weight":113,"slug":114},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":116,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":117,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":119},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":118,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":121,"show_sort_weight":118,"slug":122},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":55,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":55,"slug":125},"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":82,"data":131},{"doc_id":79,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":26,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":55,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":145},962085564381,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_6f874abed73319feea01a86fa6f0fab8","| Ed Process Int J\u003Cbr>[www.edupij.com](www.edupij.com) |  |  |  |  |  | \u003Cbr>ISSN 2147-0901 (Print), 2564-8020 (Online) |  |  |\n| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |\n| Review Article\u003Cbr>Cite this article: Alisoy, H., & Sadigzade, Z.(2025) . Comparative Analysis of Mobile Applications and Traditional Methods in Vocabulary Acquisition. Educational Process:\u003Cbr>International Journal, 17, e2025322 .\u003Cbr>[https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.17.322](https://doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2025.17.322)\u003Cbr>Received May 9, 2025\u003Cbr>Accepted June 22, 2025\u003Cbr>Published Online July 10, 2025\u003Cbr>Keywords: Mobile learning; vocabulary acquisition; ESL; spaced repetition; selfregulated learning\u003Cbr>Author for correspondence:\u003Cbr>Hasan Alisoy\u003Cbr> [alisoyhasan@ndu.edu.az](alisoyhasan@ndu.edu.az)\u003Cbr> Lecturer, Nakhchivan State University, Azerbaijan. |  |  |  |  |  | Comparative Analysis of Mobile Applications and Traditional Methods in Vocabulary Acquisition\u003Cbr>Hasan Alisoy, Zarifa Sadigzade |  |  |\n|  |  |  |  |  |  | Abstract\u003Cbr>Background/purpose. This study provides a comparative review of mobile applications and traditional classroom methods in English vocabulary acquisition. It explores whether mobile-assisted vocabulary learning (MAVL) results in better retention, engagement, and productive vocabulary use among ESL learners. The study also aims to identify underlying theories supporting each method and assess learner preferences across diverse contexts.\u003Cbr>Materials/methods. A theoretical, narrative literature review was conducted by analyzing peer-reviewed articles published between 2018 and 2025. Studies were retrieved from databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar using keywords including\"mobile learning,\" \"ESL,\" and \"vocabulary acquisition. \" The review applied strict inclusion/exclusion criteria, focusing on research comparing MAVL with traditional methods, and employed thematic synthesis of learner profiles, research design, outcomes, and theoretical frameworks such as spaced repetition, dual coding, and selfregulated learning.\u003Cbr>Results. Findings indicate that mobile applications often lead to superior vocabulary retention and learner engagement, largely due to multimedia features, spaced repetition, and gamification. However, traditional methods remain strong in developing productive vocabulary skills through contextual and teacher-mediated instruction. In several cases, a blended approach combining both methods yielded the most effective outcomes.\u003Cbr>Conclusion. Mobile applications offer significant advantages in ESL vocabulary acquisition, particularly in terms of retention, motivation, and learner autonomy. Yet, to fully develop productive skills and contextual understanding, these tools should be integrated into traditional classroom instruction. Future research should focus on longterm retention, productive language use, and adaptive hybrid models to optimize vocabulary learning outcomes. |  |  |\n|  | | | OPEN ACCESS |  |  |  |  |  |\n| © The Author(s), 2025. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license ([https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/](https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution, and reproduction, provided the original article is properly cited. |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |\n|  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |\n\n1. Introduction  \nVocabulary mastery is the linchpin of second-language success—without a robust word bank, even the most motivated ESL learners struggle to read complex texts, participate in discussions, or write with confidence. Yet traditional techniques (flashcards, word lists, in-class drills) can feel repetitive and fail to engage learners beyond the classroom. At the same time, mobile apps promise anytime, multimedia practice, but their true impact on long-term retention and real-world use remains unclear. This review, therefore, examines peer-rev","cbCaikNkGUubGQN1","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaikNkGUubGQN1","pdf",487279,16,"English","# Introduction\n## Background and motivation\n## Traditional vocabulary teaching methods\n## Emergence of mobile learning\n## Evidence from prior meta-analyses\n# Abstract\n## Background/purpose\n## Materials/methods\n## Results\n## Conclusion","[{\"question\":\"What is the main goal of this review article?\",\"answer\":\"It compares mobile applications and traditional classroom methods for English vocabulary acquisition and evaluates whether mobile-assisted vocabulary learning improves retention, engagement, and productive vocabulary use.\"},{\"question\":\"How were studies selected and analyzed?\",\"answer\":\"Peer-reviewed articles published between 2018 and 2025 were retrieved from databases such as Scopus, Web of Science, ERIC, and Google Scholar, then synthesized using thematic analysis under strict inclusion/exclusion criteria.\"},{\"question\":\"What do the findings suggest about mobile apps versus traditional methods?\",\"answer\":\"Mobile applications often support superior vocabulary retention and learner engagement due to multimedia features, spaced repetition, and gamification, while traditional methods remain strong for productive vocabulary skills through contextual and teacher-mediated instruction.\"}]","Comparative Analysis of Mobile Applications and Traditional Methods in Vocabulary Acquisition - Review Article | PDF",1790636031,25]