The Science Behind Klana
Discover how Klana implements research-proven techniques for optimal vocabulary learning, based on decades of cognitive science studies.
Research Foundation
Klana's design is grounded in Tatsuya Nakata's seminal 2011 study " Computer-assisted second language vocabulary learning in a paired-associate paradigm: a critical investigation of flashcard software", which established 17 scientific criteria for evaluating flashcard applications based on decades of cognitive psychology research.
Research Impact: Klana implements all 17 evaluation criteria identified in Nakata's comprehensive analysis, making it one of the few applications that fully meets scientific standards for optimal vocabulary learning.
17 Research-Proven Criteria Implementation
Each criterion is backed by peer-reviewed research and implemented according to scientific best practices.
📝 1. Flashcard Creation
Ability to create custom flashcards with user-defined content and formatting. (Nakata, 2011)
Essential for personalized learning and specialized vocabulary🌍 2. Multilingual Support
Support for multiple languages with proper Unicode encoding and input methods. (Nakata, 2011)
Enables learning diverse language pairs effectively🔗 3. Multi-word Units
Support for phrases, collocations, and formulaic sequences as single learning items. (Wray, 2000)
Critical for natural language acquisition patterns💾 4. Types of Information
Comprehensive data entry supporting meanings, contexts, audio, images, and additional metadata. (Laufer & Goldstein, 2004)
Rich information enhances retention and understanding🛠️ 5. Support for Data Entry
Automated assistance for flashcard creation through dictionary integration and content suggestions. (Nakata, 2011)
Reduces time spent on card creation, more time for learning📂 6. Flashcard Sets
Organization of cards into decks and categories for structured learning progression. (Tinkham, 1993)
Prevents semantic interference while maintaining organization👁️ 7. Presentation Mode
Study mode where learners familiarize themselves with new items without testing pressure. (Barcroft, 2002)
Reduces cognitive load during initial acquisition🔍 8. Retrieval Mode
Testing mode that asks learners to recall or recognize target words and meanings. (Bjork, 1994)
Active retrieval strengthens memory consolidation⬅️ 9. Receptive Recall
Exercises requiring learners to produce meanings of target words from memory. (Laufer et al., 2004)
Tests comprehension and meaning retrieval skills✅ 10. Receptive Recognition
Multiple-choice exercises asking learners to choose meanings of target words. (Laufer et al., 2004)
Builds recognition skills with scaffolded support➡️ 11. Productive Recall
Exercises requiring learners to produce target word forms from given meanings. (Laufer et al., 2004)
Develops active vocabulary and production skills🖱️ 12. Productive Recognition
Multiple-choice exercises asking learners to choose target word forms for given meanings. (Laufer et al., 2004)
Bridges recognition and production skills📈 13. Increasing Retrieval Difficulty
Systematic progression from easier recognition to more challenging recall exercises. (Bjork, 1999)
Implements desirable difficulties for stronger learning💡 14. Generative Use
Encourages encountering target words in novel contexts, senses, and grammatical functions. (Joe, 1995, 1998)
Promotes deep understanding and flexible word knowledge🎚️ 15. Block Size
Flexible control over the number of items studied in each learning session. (Kornell, 2009)
Accommodates different learning preferences and schedules🗺️ 16. Adaptive Sequencing
Algorithm adjusts item presentation order based on individual learner performance patterns. (Siegel & Misselt, 1984)
Optimizes learning efficiency through personalization⏰ 17. Expanded Rehearsal
Gradually increasing intervals between reviews to optimize long-term retention. (Bahrick & Phelps, 1987)
Spaced repetition matches natural forgetting curvesResearch Foundation & Academic References
Klana's design is grounded in decades of peer-reviewed research from leading cognitive psychology and language learning journals.
Primary Research Foundation
Nakata, T. (2011). Computer-assisted second language vocabulary learning in a paired-associate paradigm: a critical investigation of flashcard software. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 24(1), 17-38.
The foundational study establishing the 17 scientific criteria for flashcard software evaluation.Spaced Repetition & Memory Research
Bahrick, H. P., Bahrick, L. E., Bahrick, A. S., & Bahrick, P. E. (1993). Maintenance of foreign language vocabulary and the spacing effect. Psychological Science, 4(5), 316-321.
Seminal research on spacing effects in vocabulary retention over extended periods.Bahrick, H. P., & Phelps, E. (1987). Retention of Spanish vocabulary over 8 years. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 13(2), 344-349.
Long-term study demonstrating expanded rehearsal effectiveness.Pimsleur, P. (1967). A memory schedule. Modern Language Journal, 51(2), 73-75.
Introduction of graduated interval recall methodology.Retrieval Practice & Testing Effects
Bjork, R. A. (1994). Memory and metamemory considerations in the training of human beings. In J. Metcalfe & A. Shimamura (Eds.), Metacognition: Knowing about knowing (pp. 185-205). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Foundational work on desirable difficulties and retrieval practice.Bjork, R. A. (1999). Assessing our own competence: Heuristics and illusions. In D. Gopher & A. Koriat (Eds.), Attention and performance XVII (pp. 435-459). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Further development of retrieval practice theory and metacognitive considerations.Karpicke, J. D., & Roediger, H. L. (2007). Expanding retrieval practice promotes short-term retention, but equally spaced retrieval enhances long-term retention. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33(4), 704-719.
Comparative study of different retrieval scheduling approaches.Karpicke, J. D. (2009). Metacognitive control and strategy selection: Deciding to practice retrieval during learning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 138(4), 469-486.
Research on learner metacognition and feedback in retrieval practice.Pyc, M. A., & Rawson, K. A. (2009). Testing the retrieval effort hypothesis: Does greater difficulty correctly recalling information lead to higher levels of memory? Journal of Memory and Language, 60(4), 437-447.
Investigation of retrieval difficulty effects on memory consolidation.Vocabulary Learning & CALL
Nation, I. S. P. (1990). Teaching and learning vocabulary. Boston: Heinle & Heinle.
Comprehensive framework for vocabulary instruction and flashcard creation principles.Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Definitive work on vocabulary acquisition including TOPRA model development.Ellis, N. C. (1995). The psychology of foreign language vocabulary acquisition: Implications for CALL. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 8(2), 103-128.
Psychological foundations for computer-assisted vocabulary learning design.Hulstijn, J. H. (2001). Intentional and incidental second language vocabulary learning: A reappraisal of elaboration, rehearsal, and automaticity. In P. Robinson (Ed.), Cognition and second language instruction (pp. 258-286). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Analysis of intentional versus incidental vocabulary learning mechanisms.Joe, A. (1995). Text-based tasks and incidental vocabulary learning. Second Language Research, 11(2), 149-158.
Research on generative vocabulary use and contextual learning effects.Joe, A. (1998). What effects do text-based tasks promoting generation have on incidental vocabulary acquisition? Applied Linguistics, 19(3), 357-377.
Follow-up study on generation effects in vocabulary learning tasks.Technology & Multimedia Learning
Chapelle, C. A. (1998). Multimedia CALL: Lessons to be learned from research on instructed SLA. Language Learning & Technology, 2(1), 21-39.
Framework for multimedia integration in language learning applications.Chun, D., & Plass, J. (1996). Effects of multimedia annotations on vocabulary acquisition. The Modern Language Journal, 80(2), 183-198.
Research on multimedia effects in vocabulary learning and dual coding theory.Godwin-Jones, R. (2008). Emerging technologies mobile-computing trends: Lighter, faster, smarter. Language Learning & Technology, 12(3), 3-9.
Analysis of mobile learning trends and cross-platform accessibility.Learning Theory & Cognitive Science
Barcroft, J. (2002). Semantic and structural elaboration in L2 lexical acquisition. Language Learning, 52(2), 323-363.
Research on cognitive load and elaboration effects in vocabulary acquisition.Barcroft, J. (2007). Effects of opportunities for word retrieval during second language vocabulary learning. Language Learning, 57(1), 35-56.
Investigation of retrieval opportunity frequency and feedback timing.Kornell, N. (2009). Optimising learning using flashcards: Spacing is more important than cramming. Applied Cognitive Psychology, 23(9), 1297-1317.
Empirical validation of spaced practice superiority and session size effects.Kornell, N., & Bjork, R. A. (2008). Optimising self-regulated study: The benefits—and costs—of dropping flashcards. Memory, 16(2), 125-136.
Research on learner control and self-regulation in flashcard learning.Specialized Learning Factors
Wray, A. (2000). Formulaic sequences in second language teaching: Principle and practice. Applied Linguistics, 21(4), 463-489.
Theoretical foundation for multi-word unit learning and formulaic sequences.Tinkham, T. (1993). The effect of semantic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. System, 21(3), 371-380.
Research on semantic interference and vocabulary organization principles.Webb, S. A. (2009). The effects of receptive and productive learning of word pairs on vocabulary knowledge. RELC Journal, 40(3), 360-376.
Comparative analysis of different exercise types and knowledge dimensions.Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness. Language Learning, 54(3), 399-436.
Framework for comprehensive vocabulary knowledge assessment and data entry.Siegel, M. A., & Misselt, A. L. (1984). Adaptive feedback and review paradigm for computer-based drills. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76(2), 310-317.
Early research on adaptive sequencing algorithms in educational software.Groot, P. J. M. (2000). Computer assisted second language vocabulary acquisition. Language Learning & Technology, 4(1), 60-81.
Comprehensive analysis of CALL effectiveness and distractor generation principles.Total References: 25+ peer-reviewed studies from leading academic journals
All research has been published in top-tier journals including Language Learning, Applied Linguistics, Journal of Experimental Psychology, Computer Assisted Language Learning, and Language Learning & Technology.
Experience Science-Based Learning
Join thousands of learners who have accelerated their language acquisition using Klana's research-proven methodology.
No credit card required • 7-day free trial • Cancel anytime