What if we removed the "Learned LingQs" statistic?

Nobuo has an interesting post on the Japanese Forum about our statistics. He thinks that is difficult, especially for a newcomer, to understand the difference between Known words and Learned words. I agree, In fact, I doubt if the distinction is useful. Here is why.

I learn more words incidentally, that is, not deliberately, than I learn through deliberate study. As I read, and Create LingQs, and review my words, I notice relationships between words and am often able to understand new words that I encounter in my reading. The more words I know, the more I can guess from context. So, often when I click “I Know All”, I will add to my Known Words total, not only words that I already knew before, but also new words that I did not need to look up.

So really, we only need to track the Known Words total and not the Learned Words total. This might remove some confusion.

What do you think?

This has nothing to do with the discussion on other threads about whether our statistics are working properly. That is another issue and one that we are still studying.

Hi Steve!
Thank you for your attention to my thought in the Japanese forum. I’m afraid my post is too critical against LingQ’s statistic. That’s why I wrote it in Japanese.

Removing the “Learned LingQs” statistic is not my idea. I think I don’t need the complicated statistic in my progress snapshot. Because it’s very difficult for us to understand how those counting are made. Not only the time of site update, many new members asked about Known Words, Activities Scores and other counting numbers. I believe many of the new comers give up to understand the LingQ’s statistic and leave LingQ without questions.

The ranking, scores and graph are good for keeping our motivation, However the LingQs statistic is too complicated. Simple is better.

I’d like to keep them both. I often learn words in contexts other than LingQ. However, LingQ is the only place I use flash cards. The LingQs Learned figures indicate my progress here at LingQ. The total number of words can be fairly misleading (although a good rough estimate). LingQs Learned is the only good progress gauge.

As a joke, let’s add a Forgotten LingQs stat. It would indicate the number of words you once learned, but created LingQs for again.

Hehe, that would be fun. I’ve actually thought of suggesting that the status decreases to level 1 once you click a forgotten word.


It is difficult to make everybody happy. Many people are motivated by the statistics and find them motivating. I see here that people like the Learned Words and Known Words. People who are not interested in them can ignore them. My inclination is not to change things unless there is an obvious benefit in doing so.

I only follow my Saved LingQ and Known Words number, even though I know that the Known Words number may not be accurate. I do notice however that more and more I can study difficult texts in Russian and fine very few words that I do not know, at least to some extent.

I know some members (not many) are motivated by the statistics here in LIngQ. And I’m one of members who find them motivating. It’s fun to see my full graph everyday.

Last month, I created many LingQs and did flashcard everyday. Then I surprise the fact that my activities score ranking went up day by day. I found that the number of LingQing and flashcard addicts is not so big. The people who addict LingQing are only twenty or thirty people.

I realize the those kinds of statistic are good idea and important tool in LIngQ. What I wanted to say is the way of counting is too complicated for new comers. The definition of LingQ original terms (like Known Words, New Words, LingQ Learned, Activity Score) is difficult to understand.

I believe that this LingQ statistic difficulty disturb to grow the number of LingQ addicts and regular active users. Most trial free users don’t care about the number of Known Words and their activity score, I think.

Here is my idea.
Number of visit LingQ site (monthly)
Number of messages which posting in the forums
Created LingQ daily ranking (each and all languages)
Created LingQ weekly ranking
Created LingQ monthly ranking
Number of everyday adding Known words. weekly and monthly
Number of open lessons weekly and monthly and its ranking
Number of writing ranking weekly and monthly and its ranking
Hours of speaking events weekly and monthly and its ranking

The activity score (from first day to last day of the month) is better than the activity score (last 30 days). Because it’s easier to understand. Even if they are new comers, they can compete and enjoy the ranking everyday.

Those are my rough idea and I understand each person have each idea.

Lastly I enjoy the present LingQ statistic, but I’m getting bored to read many questions, answers, explanations about “Learned LingQs” on the forums.

I enjoy the present statistics, it is how I motivate myself to spend some time on the language each day, and if I mess up and miss a day, then I can make up for it the next day because I can pay attention to the Last 7 Days Statistic, last 2 weeks, last month, etc.

However, one thing that is kind of confusing for me is that these statistics move each day. So I never know when the “week” of study ends, it just keeps re-starting every day. I like the idea of basing it on calendar weeks and calendar months instead of last 7 days, last month, etc. I think this would be less confusing. Maybe paying members can also have the option to view their full statistics (i.e. week-by-week, month-by-month, for previous weeks and months), to compare if their activity goes up or down over time, etc., but on the profile page continue only showing statistics for the current week, month, year.

Since this may sound confusing, I will give an example. My profile page would show statistics for Today and Yesterday, and then also for this current week (as of last Sunday), and for the current month (as of August 1st), and the current year (as of January 1st). Instead of showing for the last 2 weeks and 3 months, 6 months, etc. you could add in markers within the bar to mark the goals for 2 weeks, 3 months, 6 months, etc. (so within a month, users would try to get to the halfway point within 2 weeks. within a year, users would try to get to the halfway point within 6 months, and the halfway point would be marked with a line on the bar). Then, I could have the option to look at my statistics for all the months & weeks this year to compare how I did week-by-week.

This is just an idea I had on how we can make the statistics more meaningful & helpful, though I do have to say that even if you don’t implement the change, I like the statistics even as they are now because they motivate me.

Hi Janna!
I like your idea. I prefer the calender week, the calender month to last 7days, last month. Especially when I see the activity score, the counting last 30days make me confusing. Because I don’t record the daily activity score.

I hope the LingQ statistics make us more motivating.

Hi Janna,
what you propose is actually the old version is still alive. Look for the Weekly Progress (above right). Below is a finely written View Profile. By clicking to get the old version. Here, however, find all the information they you want to see. Regards

Wow! Lots of suggestions for improving our statistics. Nobuo, we may eventually provide rankings for a variety of activities on the site. We’ll see when we get some time to work on that. Janna, I’m sure there are some people who want that level of statistical breakdown but probably not the majority. For the most part, we want our statistics to act as a prod to keep members motivated and for that purpose we are happy with what is there now. There are other things we need to work on before adding new statistics and more in depth analysis. :slight_smile:

What is the basic purpose of these statistics? Answer: to evaluate and assess all the activities of each member. If this is not an essential activity evaluated (LingQs of the Day and Flashcards) this statistic missed the basic purpose. Worse is that this affected the most active members. Not just “some people”.
Interpretation: more than teach the more words you have in lavel 4, more of such words are consequently experiencing both LingQs of the Day as the Flashcards. LingQs of the Day for all members of an inhibitor but not the motivator: first or later. Because the follow-up to these words no longer statistically. Such an activity they take a lot of time but can not be evaluated. In one of its post I mentioned example of the 57 words was 50 at lavel 4. Such activity, therefore, becomes quite futile work. In that case, which is 88% of futile work. In order to understand: just speaking from the standpoint of statistics. Without taking into account that the Activity Score may not be accurate. Represent only an approximation of the actual activities of the member.
Parts of statistics (known words) are based on a combination of assumptions and statistics. The presumption is not a fact. Fact is statistically found evidence work.
The fact is that the computer programed is fully specified path of the word. This clearly demonstrated the blue highlighted words (New Words) which always end up in the statistics in a column. The same could be programmed way to achieve the level of words 4. Why do not wish to (or not) to correct the statistics capture is the second question. The existing statistics are far from a possible maximum. Anyone who is satisfied with such statistics, or even considered that this motivational blind ourselves and others.

The statistics are a part of the service offered at LingQ. The statistics do not attempt to be “scientific”,
just to stimulate the learner and provide an indication of his/her level of activity. These statistics cannot measure his/her true achievement. We will only be able to do this when we introduce a testing model for Known Words, which is in the plans.

We are not many people here at LingQ. We have spent enough time on this question for now. It is time to move on. There are many more issues. We can revisit the subject again later.

If people followed the instructions (studied the texts “as intended”, saved LingQs before marking a lesson as “known” and so on) and focused less on statistics, the language learning experience would probably be more effective and valuable.

If people follow the title theme as he thought, and less engaged with the “defense” would be more effective and useful for LingQ. Well, no offense.

I think it’s important that members are able to chatter about their ideas for improving or changing things, especially since you are “few are not many people here at LingQ.” Even if you don’t have time or resources to implement the ideas right now, why would you want to shut down conversation among some of the more active members about potential ideas for innovation that you could use later? We are just expressing our opinions and ideas, we are not complaining.

Right you are, JannaM. Chattering about ideas not only makes closer all LingQ’s users, but also gives some confidence in communicating. In my opinion, people should thoroughly elaborate on their aims. If the aim is to study a language, I think, everything possible is being done to make the way of studying easier and more exciting. Let’s take flashcards, giving us the possibility to revise words, including those once learned and then forgotten, a wide range of dictionaries, the ways of presenting reading and listening, even the opportunity to whinge. I find all these means great.The process of studying is hard work taking loads of time, strength and patience.
But if the main thing in studyng a language is stats data, people should think over the question if they really want to learn and master a foreign language. As for stats, I’m sure everything will be settled.

Let me clear. The Forum belongs to the members who can discuss what they want. The more actively people participate at the Forum the better.

There may be problems with the statistics. We do not have the resources to devote to this issue now. We have other issues that we consider more important for more people. This includes how the library works, the Asian languages problems and other issues. We will not be putting any more effort into the statistics right now, but when we are through doing other things we can come back and have a good look at it again.

Hi Steve,
Data capture and computer processing is done now. There is nothing “scientific”. Unfortunately, this is obviously the lack of execution: said gently. This is to conclude on the basis of many of the comments related to the current statistics.

The argument - “just to stimulate the learner and provide an indication of his / her level of activity” - is only one look at the statistics. Any systematic training (methodology part) is held after a plan and a certain quantity. For example, in sport, or in learning a foreign language. This was evident in the attempt to present statistics. Proof: Target setting (daily, weekly, monthly ,…). Therefore, many of us these statistics also serve as a guide in the daily of learning. This statistic is therefore yet another meaning. Thirdly: provider in this way claims success on condition that the value of reaching the intended target.

It’s still true: thesis, the placed counterpart theory (antithesis) to get the synthesis. This is therefore the optimal solution in a given situation. In this case, it was first opened up the topic, which is already at some “critical” comments, wants to quickly end. Is this a sensible and logical doing?

Statistics is not so innocent and simple as you would like to view. Are we all aware of this, is the second question.


I appreciate your enthusiasm for our site, and your input. We have a difference of opinion on the importance of certain possible inconsistencies in our statistics at this point in time.

Please continue to discuss these issues here. However, we have decided on our priorities and will stick to them for what we consider the greater good of the majority of members of the site. So, if you address your comments to me, I can only repeat what I have already said.