A Bibliometric Analysis of Second Language Acquisition Between 1997 and 2018

Zhang, Xian

doi:10.1017/s0272263119000573

Cited by 87 publications

(113 citation statements)

References 69 publications

(100 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Liu and O’Halloran, 2009) are leading multimodal analysts. As the analytical scope of applied linguistics extends from its traditional territory of language learning and teaching to professional and organizational communication, professional communication is gaining increasing popularity and impact, as evidenced in research by Bhatia (2010), Mondada (2014) and Zhang and Vásquez (2014). The discursive news values approach, conceived by Bednarek and Caple (2014, 2017), affords a new insight and analytical framework to study linguistic construction of news values, quickly drawing considerable scholarly attention in the field.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sketching landscapes in discourse analysis (1978–2018): A bibliometric study

Huan

Guan

2020

Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

John Swales’ 1986 article ‘Citation analysis and discourse analysis’ was the first to apply citation analysis to describe in-text citations in the field of discourse analysis. Howard White’s 2004 article ‘Citation analysis and discourse analysis revisited’ was written by an information scientist and primarily focused on citation analysis and discourse analysis. Here, we cast a wider net by conducting a bibliometric analysis of discourse analysis to sketch its scientific landscape between 1978 and 2018. Our findings show that discourse analysis has emerged as a major, and increasingly distinctively sociological, contribution to the analysis of language in social life. It is evident that discourse analysts are increasingly interested in such topics as corpus linguistics, digital conversation analysis, discursive news values approach, membership categorization analysis, multimodal analysis and social media. It is a general trend that the United States is no longer the only dominating publication powerhouse in the field. Countries such as the United Kingdom, Australia and China are wielding a growing share of research output.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sketching landscapes in discourse analysis (1978–2018): A bibliometric study

Huan

Guan

2020

Discourse Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Zhang's (2019) recently published bibliometric analysis of second language acquisition (SLA) research provides yet another view of the field's sampling practices. This analysis shows clearly that the field is dominated heavily by Western scholarship.…”

Section: Sampling Practices In Applied Linguisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This analysis shows clearly that the field is dominated heavily by Western scholarship. Using the 16 most influential Applied Linguistics journals as determined by Al-Hoorie and Vitta (2018), Zhang (2019) analyzed the origins of the publications in these journals. The analysis showed that the field has been heavily dominated by journals published in the U.S., publications produced at prestigious North American research institutes, and scholars working in Anglo-Saxon environments (although Japanese scholarship has been strong, and Chinese scholarship is on the rise).…”

Section: Sampling Practices In Applied Linguisticsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sampling Bias and the Problem of Generalizability in Applied Linguistics

Andringa

Godfroid

2020

Ann Rev Appl Linguist

106

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this final contribution to the issue, we discuss the important concept of generalizability and how it relates to applied linguists’ ability to serve language learners of all shades and grades. We provide insight into how biased sampling in Applied Linguistics currently is and how such bias may skew the knowledge that we, applied linguists, are building about second language learning and instruction. For example, our conclusions are often framed as universally-applying, even though the samples that have given rise to them are highly specific and Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD; Henrich, Heine, & Norenzayan, 2010). We end with a call for research and replication in more diverse contexts and with more diverse samples to promote progress in the field of Applied Linguistics as ARAL celebrates its 40th anniversary.

show abstract

“…Recent studies have further entrenched the case for vocabulary having a key role in L2 proficiency. For instance, a recent meta-analysis illustrated that vocabulary knowledge, in the aggregate, has a strong relationship with reading (r = .57) and listening (r = .56) proficiency (Zhang & Zhang, 2020). Structural equation modeling has likewise revealed that lexical measures (sophistication and cohesion) account for approximately 81% of Test of English as a Foreign Language (TOEFL) essay scores' variance, while syntactic measures are only indirectly involved (Kim & Crossley, 2018).…”

Section: L2 Instructed Vocabulary Acquisition Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Thus, we limited our focus to SSCI journals to increase the probability of reviewing the best‐quality research. Following Zhang (2020), who similarly focused upon SSCI journals, we make no judgments about non‐SSCI L2 journals and value their contributions to the field.…”

Section: Phase I: L2 Instructed Vocabulary Acquisition Research Effecmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect‐Driven Sample Sizes in Second Language Instructed Vocabulary Acquisition Research

Nicklin

Vitta

2021

The Modern Language Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study involved the analysis of 81 second language instructed vocabulary acquisition (L2 IVA) studies over 2 phases. In Phase I, we categorized and coded the effect sizes of the studies. Observing that the basic between-and within-subject design dichotomy lacked the sensitivity to capture the heterogeneity of observed effects, we employed a more granular approach. In both between-and withinsubject designs, treatment versus comparison contrasts best represented comparisons of most interest in L2 IVA experiments, with median effect sizes (g) of .62 (between-subject) and .25 (counterbalanced within-subject). In Phase II, the aggregated effect sizes observed in Phase I were utilized in a priori power simulations to suggest approximate sample sizes for common L2 IVA analyses. For conservatively powered between-subject designs, the simulations suggested sample sizes ranging from 292 to 492 participants. Counterbalanced within-subject designs required 95 to 203 subjects depending on the assumed correlation between the repeated measures. The overarching implication of these simulations suggests that future L2 IVA experiments require larger samples that reference effect sizes from previous research, and we offer 3 potential solutions to the problem of obtaining larger samples.

show abstract

A Bibliometric Analysis of Second Language Acquisition Between 1997 and 2018

Cited by 87 publications

References 69 publications

Sketching landscapes in discourse analysis (1978–2018): A bibliometric study

Sketching landscapes in discourse analysis (1978–2018): A bibliometric study

Sampling Bias and the Problem of Generalizability in Applied Linguistics

Effect‐Driven Sample Sizes in Second Language Instructed Vocabulary Acquisition Research

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About