One of the most interesting studies on the role of L1 and contrastive analysis in vocabulary teaching is by Laufer and Girsai (2008). However, due to some methodological issues, their research findings are open to criticism and controversy. The current study aimed to replicate the research with a more rigorous design to re-investigate the efficiency of three different methods of teaching new vocabularies to EFL learners. To meet this end, 105 intermediate adult participants were randomly assigned to three groups, each receiving instruction in a specific method. Sixteen target words, later embedded into a reading text, were used as instructional materials. Group 1 received non-contrastive Meaning Focused Instruction (MFI); Group 2 was exposed to non-contrastive Form Focused Instruction (FFI), and Group 3 was instructed using the Contrastive Analysis and Translation (CAT) method. Then, immediate and delayed post-tests were administered to examine the retention of the target words. The tests were designed so that the results were less affected by the compatibility between the instruction and the testing method. Nevertheless, the results indicated that each method lead to differential amounts of retention and that the compatibility between the method of treatment and the testing method might affect the results.