The Cognitive Approach to Teaching Students English Terminological Lexis of the Subject Field of “Microeconomics”

Keywords: cognitive approach, terminological lexis, subject field of “microeconomics”, logic operations of thinking, cognitive methodology


The paper is devoted to study of prerequisites of applying cognitive approach to teaching English terminological lexis of the subject field of “microeconomics” of students of non-special higher educational establishments. Such notions as “cognition”, “memory”, “attention”, “thinking”, “intelligence” that provide student’s mental activity in the process of studying have been considered. The system of cognitive exercises on learning English economic terminology that contains seven types, i.e.: exercises on choice of proper lexical information, grouping, guesswork from the context, logic thinking, formulating scientific definitions, language game, associative thinking, problem-solving, and is based on logic operations of comparison, identification, division / disjuncture, integration / conjuncture, analysis and synthesis, deduction, abstraction, generalization, classification, typology, categorization, conceptualization, formulation of notions and judgements. The exercises have been chosen according to thematic principle (the topic “Marketing’ from the author’s manual ‘Business English Course’) and include the following kinds: identifying a key word, identifying an odd word, multiple choice, finding out a particular name, grouping the words according to their semantic combinability, guesswork from the context, formulation of definitions, solving the crossword, filling in the radial diagram of the mental map by language reactions-associations to the word ‘marketing’, problem-solving of the real-like situation dealing with marketing activity in small groups and proposing a business solution. The selected exercises develop heuristic capabilities, analytic skills, logics of thinking and creative imagination of students, facilitate memorizing, strengthen attention, intensify subject and foreign languages knowledge, help to acquire new knowledge, structure information in verbal and visual forms, motivate research activity. 


Download data is not yet available.


Bodnar, S.V. (2014). Kognityvny pidhid do formuvannia leksychnoyi kompetentnosti studentiv ekonomichnykh spetsialnostey [Cognitive approach to forming lexical competence of students of economic specialties]. Nauka i osvita – Science and Education, 10, 34–38 [in Ukrainian].
Borshchovetska, V.D. (2004). Navchannia studentiv-economistiv angliyskoyi fakhovoyi leksyky [Teaching Students-Economists English Special Lexis]. Candidate’s thesis. Кyiv: KeivSLU [in Ukrainian].
Vundt, V. (1992). Vvedeniye v psikhologiyu [Introduction to Psychology]. Мoscow: KomKniga [in Russian].
Zinchenko, P.I. (2002). Neproizvolnoye zapominaniye [Involuntary Memorizing]. Мoscow: Direktmedia Publishing [in Russian].
Intelekt [Intelligence]. Vikipediya [Wikipedia]. Retrieved from [in Ukrainian].
Druzhinin, V.N., & Ushakov, D.V. (Eds.) (2002). Kognityvnaya psyhologiya [Cognitive Psychology]. Мoscow: PER SE [in Russian].
Krupchenko, A.K., & Kuznetsov, А.N. (2015). Osnovy professionalnoi lingvadidaktiki [The Fundamentals of Professional Lingual Didactics]. Мoscow: АPКiPPRО [in Russian].
Luriya, A.R. (2003). Osnovy neiropsikhologii [The Fundamentals of Neuropsychology]. Мoscow: Akademiya [in Russian].
Melnyk, R.A. (2014). Kognityvny pidhid do navchannia spetsialnoyi leksyky studentiv-ekonomistiv [Cognitive Approach to Teaching Special Lexis Students-Economists]. Naukovyi chasopys NPU imeni М.P. Dragomanovа – Scientifi c Journal of NPU named after М.P. Dragomanov, 49, 124–129 [in Ukrainian].
Rubinshtein, S.L. (2002). Osnovy obshchei psikhologii [The Fundamentals of General Psychology]. St.Petersburg: Piter [in Russian].
Shynkaruk, V.І. (Ed.) (2002). Filosofskyi entsyklopedychnyi slovnyk [Philosophical Encyclopedic Dictionary]. Кyiv: Abrys [in Ukrainian]. Akin, L. (2017). A Study of the Effects of Thinking Maps on the Achievement of Students in Middle Class Science: Doctor’s thesis. Columbus State University.
Alloway, T.P., Bibile, V., Lau, G. (2013). Computerized Working Memory Training: Can it lead to gains in cognitive skills in students? Computers in Human Behavior, 29, 632–638. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2012.10.023
Astor, I. (2008). The Effectiveness of Thinking Maps in Improving the Achievement and Skills beyond the Knowledge among First-Grade Secondary Students in Logic Course. Studies in Curriculums and Teaching Methods, 132, 21–81.
Channel, J., Carter, R.,  McCarthy, M. (1996). Psychological Considerations in the Study of L2 Vocabulary Acquisition. Vocabulary and Language Teaching, (pp. 83–95). London, New York: Longman.
Chien, J.M.,  Morrison, A.B. (2010). Expanding in Mind’s Workspace: Training and transfer effects with a complex working memory span task. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 17(2), 193–199. doi: 10.3758/PBR.17.2.193
Clark, J.M.,  Paivio, A.A. (1987). Dual Coding Perspective on Encoding Processes. Imagery and Related Mnemonic Process. Theories, Individual Differences, and Applications. M. McDaniel, M. Pressley (Eds.). Retrieved from
Conway, A.R.A., Kane, M.J.,  Engle, R.W. (2003). Working Memory Capacity and its Relation to General Intelligence. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7(12), 547–552. doi: 10.1016/j.tics.2003.10.005
Hassan, S.R., Rosli R., & Zakaria, E. (2016). The Use of i-think Map and Questioning to Promote Higher-Order Thinking Skills in Mathematics. Creative Education, 7(7), 1069–1078. doi: 10.4236/ce.2016.77111
Huang, L. (2015). Grouping by Similarity is Mediated by Feature Selection: Evidence from the Failure of Cue Combination. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 22(5), 1364–1369. doi: 10.3758/513423-015-0801-z
Jaeggi, S.M., Buschkuehi, M., Jonides, J.,  Shah, P. (2011). Short- and Longterm Benefi ts of Cognitive Training. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 108(25), 10081–10086. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1103228108
Naumenko, L. (2014). Business English Course. Кyiv: Logos [in English].
Rosch, E. (1983). Prototype Classifi cation and Logical Classifi cation. The Two Systems. New Trends in Conceptual Representation Challenges to Piaget’s Theory? (pp. 73–86), Hillsdale: Lawrence Enbaum Publ.
Shipstead, Z., Redick, T.S.,  Engle, R.W. (2012). Is Working Memory Training Effective? Psychological Bulletin, 138(4), 628–654. doi: 10.1037/a0027473
Snider, J.G. & Osgood, C.E. (Eds.) (1969). Semantic Differential Technique. Chicago: Aldine Publ.
Sоlsо, R. (2001). Cognitive Psychology. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Thurstone, L. (1999). The Nature of Intelligence. Abingdon-on-Thames: Routledge.
Vovk, Y.I. (2012). Cognitive Approach to Language Teaching. European Researcher, 35(11-3), 2056–2059.
Wierzbicka, A. (1972). Semantic Primitives. Frankfurt. Mjscow : Athenaum-Verl.

Abstract views: 313
PDF Downloads: 187
How to Cite
Naumenko, L., & ОliynykО. (2018). The Cognitive Approach to Teaching Students English Terminological Lexis of the Subject Field of “Microeconomics”. PSYCHOLINGUISTICS, 24(2), 236-253.