Nowadays, research in second language acquisition (SLA) is becoming increasingly interdisciplinary while many technical frontiers and research hotspots have emerged. Many studies focus on interdisciplinary topics, but few in-depth studies have been conducted on interdisciplinarity. This study examined the interdisciplinarity of SLA and the interdisciplinary development process using a bibliometrics approach. The study has found that the SLA discipline has played roles as both the provider and recipient of knowledge in the development of interdisciplines. In the first case, SLA theories and methods flow into the research areas of life sciences and technology to form interdisciplinary studies with brain research, neurology, cognition, computer technology, and engineering, making SLA a provider of knowledge In the second case, SLA research receives knowledge from areas of arts and humanities and social sciences as well as from interdisciplinary studies within its own discipline, making SLA a receiver of knowledge. The new insights into the interdisciplinarity of SLA provided in this study are helpful for our deeper understanding of the interdisciplinary nature of the SLA discipline.
{"title":"SLA as an interdiscipline: A bibliometric study","authors":"Meng-Lin Chen","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40218","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40218","url":null,"abstract":"Nowadays, research in second language acquisition (SLA) is becoming increasingly interdisciplinary while many technical frontiers and research hotspots have emerged. Many studies focus on interdisciplinary topics, but few in-depth studies have been conducted on interdisciplinarity. This study examined the interdisciplinarity of SLA and the interdisciplinary development process using a bibliometrics approach. The study has found that the SLA discipline has played roles as both the provider and recipient of knowledge in the development of interdisciplines. In the first case, SLA theories and methods flow into the research areas of life sciences and technology to form interdisciplinary studies with brain research, neurology, cognition, computer technology, and engineering, making SLA a provider of knowledge In the second case, SLA research receives knowledge from areas of arts and humanities and social sciences as well as from interdisciplinary studies within its own discipline, making SLA a receiver of knowledge. The new insights into the interdisciplinarity of SLA provided in this study are helpful for our deeper understanding of the interdisciplinary nature of the SLA discipline.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"13 9","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139151706","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This paper reports a bibliometric analysis of two small data sets: a set of 34 papers that make up The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (Webb, 2020) and a set of papers dealing with second language (L2) vocabulary research taken from a single journal Frontiers in Psychology. Bibliometric maps based on author co-citations in these two data sets are presented and compared. Although the two data sets are comparable in terms of size, they appear to be very divergent. In particular, the significant sources identified in The Handbook map seem to play a relatively minor role in the Frontiers map. The obvious conclusion is that The Handbook is not as representative of L2 vocabulary research as its title might lead us to believe. The paper argues that micro-bibliometric studies like this one can sometimes highlight features that are lost in the more traditional large-scale bibliometric approach.
本文报告了对两个小型数据集的文献计量分析：一个是《Routledge 词汇研究手册》（Webb, 2020 年）中的 34 篇论文集，另一个是从《心理学前沿》（Frontiers in Psychology）这一单一期刊中摘录的有关第二语言（L2）词汇研究的论文集。基于这两组数据中作者共同引用的文献计量图进行了展示和比较。尽管两个数据集在规模上不相上下，但它们似乎存在很大差异。特别是，《手册》图谱中确定的重要来源在《前沿》图谱中的作用似乎相对较小。显而易见的结论是，《手册》并不像它的标题可能让我们相信的那样能代表 L2 词汇研究。本文认为，像这样的微观文献计量学研究有时可以凸显出更传统的大规模文献计量学方法所忽略的特征。
{"title":"The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies: A study in micro-bibliometrics","authors":"P. Meara","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40219","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40219","url":null,"abstract":"This paper reports a bibliometric analysis of two small data sets: a set of 34 papers that make up The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies (Webb, 2020) and a set of papers dealing with second language (L2) vocabulary research taken from a single journal Frontiers in Psychology. Bibliometric maps based on author co-citations in these two data sets are presented and compared. Although the two data sets are comparable in terms of size, they appear to be very divergent. In particular, the significant sources identified in The Handbook map seem to play a relatively minor role in the Frontiers map. The obvious conclusion is that The Handbook is not as representative of L2 vocabulary research as its title might lead us to believe. The paper argues that micro-bibliometric studies like this one can sometimes highlight features that are lost in the more traditional large-scale bibliometric approach.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"53 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139151752","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
In this paper, I first discuss the field of bibliometrics, which is a quantitative approach to analyzing scholarly publications, and its subfield, scientometrics, which focuses exclusively on scientific literature. I argue that the use of bibliometric methods has been growing in applied linguistics in recent years, and explore the common features between bibliometrics and scientometrics. I will then review the papers published in the special issue on bibliometrics in applied linguistics, which features nine papers on various bibliometric topics. I conclude with suggestions for future research in the field, including the development of scales for measuring perceived prestige, investigation of indicators of influence and a predictive theory for impact of second language (L2) research, and further investigation into the imbalance in the representation of authors based in different parts of the world.
{"title":"Bibliometrics and scientometrics in applied linguistics: Epilogue to the special issue","authors":"Vahid Aryadoust","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40221","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40221","url":null,"abstract":"In this paper, I first discuss the field of bibliometrics, which is a quantitative approach to analyzing scholarly publications, and its subfield, scientometrics, which focuses exclusively on scientific literature. I argue that the use of bibliometric methods has been growing in applied linguistics in recent years, and explore the common features between bibliometrics and scientometrics. I will then review the papers published in the special issue on bibliometrics in applied linguistics, which features nine papers on various bibliometric topics. I conclude with suggestions for future research in the field, including the development of scales for measuring perceived prestige, investigation of indicators of influence and a predictive theory for impact of second language (L2) research, and further investigation into the imbalance in the representation of authors based in different parts of the world.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"349 12","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139152268","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
{"title":"Reviewers for Volume 13/2023","authors":"ssllt","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40658","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40658","url":null,"abstract":"Reviewers for Volume 13/2023","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"357 10","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139148961","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
The current study draws on synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis to explore the patterns of scientific collaboration in light of methodological orientations. We examined 3,992 applied linguistics (AL) articles published in 18 top-tier journals from 2009 to 2018 and analyzed their methodological orientations and scientific collaboration. Considering that the number of co-authored papers outweighs single-authored counterparts, our results revealed that the overall degree of collaboration for AL journals was moderate-to-high (57.7%). In particular, quantitative studies contained the highest degree of collaboration (66.8%). This was followed by systematic reviews (60.9%), and mixed-methods approach (55.7%). Country-wise, our overall findings further indicated that the United States and the United Kingdom were the two main hubs of collaborative activities for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research. While the USA was the top country in systematic reviews like all other research approaches, the UK was the fifth country in systematic reviews. As for collaborating authors, our findings demonstrated that the most influential quantitative researchers had collaborated on Natural Language Processing (NLP) and data mining. While the mixed-methods researchers had a tendency to collaborate on conceptual issues subscribing to the language testing and assessment strand, the most productive qualitative researchers had collaborated on L2 writing issues. Implications for applied linguistics research are further discussed.
{"title":"Collaboration network of applied linguistics research articles with different methodological orientations","authors":"Mohammad Amini Farsani, H. Jamali","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40214","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40214","url":null,"abstract":"The current study draws on synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis to explore the patterns of scientific collaboration in light of methodological orientations. We examined 3,992 applied linguistics (AL) articles published in 18 top-tier journals from 2009 to 2018 and analyzed their methodological orientations and scientific collaboration. Considering that the number of co-authored papers outweighs single-authored counterparts, our results revealed that the overall degree of collaboration for AL journals was moderate-to-high (57.7%). In particular, quantitative studies contained the highest degree of collaboration (66.8%). This was followed by systematic reviews (60.9%), and mixed-methods approach (55.7%). Country-wise, our overall findings further indicated that the United States and the United Kingdom were the two main hubs of collaborative activities for quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods research. While the USA was the top country in systematic reviews like all other research approaches, the UK was the fifth country in systematic reviews. As for collaborating authors, our findings demonstrated that the most influential quantitative researchers had collaborated on Natural Language Processing (NLP) and data mining. While the mixed-methods researchers had a tendency to collaborate on conceptual issues subscribing to the language testing and assessment strand, the most productive qualitative researchers had collaborated on L2 writing issues. Implications for applied linguistics research are further discussed.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"155 1‐5","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139149272","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
A. Riazi, H. Ghanbar, Fahimeh Marefat, Ismaeil Fazel
We report the results of a bibliometric study of 696 empirical articles (EAs) published in TESOL Quarterly (TQ) over its lifespan (1967-2019). We report overall and periodic reviews (1967-1979, 1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, 2010-2019) concerning the following themes: (1) contexts and participants, (2) research foci and theoretical orientations, and (3) research methodology and data sources. A typical article was written by a single author addressing a learning/teaching English issue related to undergraduates in US universities. The most common research foci were instruction, learning, and assessment. A quarter of the articles did not have a specifiable theoretical orientation, and for those that had, the main theoretical orientations were linguistic/scientific, linguistic/cognitive, and social. The most frequently used research methodologies were quantitative, qualitative, and eclectic, and the top three data sources used by researchers were elicitation, multiple sources, and observation. Based on the findings, we make suggestions for future research in TESOL. Overall, the present review and analysis of published EAs give readers a birds-eye view of the research gravity in TQ over the last 52 years.
{"title":"Review and analysis of empirical articles published in TESOL Quarterly over its lifespan","authors":"A. Riazi, H. Ghanbar, Fahimeh Marefat, Ismaeil Fazel","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40217","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40217","url":null,"abstract":"We report the results of a bibliometric study of 696 empirical articles (EAs) published in TESOL Quarterly (TQ) over its lifespan (1967-2019). We report overall and periodic reviews (1967-1979, 1980-1989, 1990-1999, 2000-2009, 2010-2019) concerning the following themes: (1) contexts and participants, (2) research foci and theoretical orientations, and (3) research methodology and data sources. A typical article was written by a single author addressing a learning/teaching English issue related to undergraduates in US universities. The most common research foci were instruction, learning, and assessment. A quarter of the articles did not have a specifiable theoretical orientation, and for those that had, the main theoretical orientations were linguistic/scientific, linguistic/cognitive, and social. The most frequently used research methodologies were quantitative, qualitative, and eclectic, and the top three data sources used by researchers were elicitation, multiple sources, and observation. Based on the findings, we make suggestions for future research in TESOL. Overall, the present review and analysis of published EAs give readers a birds-eye view of the research gravity in TQ over the last 52 years.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"73 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139151740","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Yiran Xu, Jingyuan Zhuang, Ryan Blair, Amy I. Kim, Fei Li, Rachel Thorson Hernández, Luke Plonsky
The importance of academic journals in second language (L2) research is evident on at least two levels. Journals are, first of all, central to the process of disseminating scientific findings. Journals are also critical on a professional level as most L2 researchers must publish articles to advance their careers. However, not all journals are perceived as equal; some may be considered more prestigious or of higher quality and may, therefore, achieve a greater impact on the field. It is therefore necessary that we understand the identity and quality of L2 research journals, yet very little research (e.g., Egbert, 2007; VanPatten & Williams, 2002) has considered these issues to date. The current study sought to explore L2 journal identity and quality, and the relationship between these constructs. In order to do so, a database was compiled based on three different types of sources: (1) a questionnaire eliciting L2 researchers’ perceptions of the quality and prestige of 27 journals that publish L2 research (N = 327); (2) manual coding of different types of articles (e.g., empirical studies, review papers), data (quantitative, qualitative, mixed), research settings, and authorship patterns (K = 2,024) using the same 27 journals; and (3) bibliometric and submission data such as impact factors, citation counts, and acceptance rates. Descriptive statistics were applied to explore overall quality and prestige ratings as well as publication trends found in each journal. The relationships between those patterns and subjective ratings were also examined. In addition, regression models were built to determine the extent to which perceptions of journal quality and prestige could be explained as a function of journal and article features. We discuss the findings of the study in terms of on-going debates concerning publication practices, study quality, impact factors, journal selection, and the “journal culture” in applied linguistics.
{"title":"Modeling quality and prestige in applied linguistics journals: A bibliometric and synthetic analysis","authors":"Yiran Xu, Jingyuan Zhuang, Ryan Blair, Amy I. Kim, Fei Li, Rachel Thorson Hernández, Luke Plonsky","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40215","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40215","url":null,"abstract":"The importance of academic journals in second language (L2) research is evident on at least two levels. Journals are, first of all, central to the process of disseminating scientific findings. Journals are also critical on a professional level as most L2 researchers must publish articles to advance their careers. However, not all journals are perceived as equal; some may be considered more prestigious or of higher quality and may, therefore, achieve a greater impact on the field. It is therefore necessary that we understand the identity and quality of L2 research journals, yet very little research (e.g., Egbert, 2007; VanPatten & Williams, 2002) has considered these issues to date. The current study sought to explore L2 journal identity and quality, and the relationship between these constructs. In order to do so, a database was compiled based on three different types of sources: (1) a questionnaire eliciting L2 researchers’ perceptions of the quality and prestige of 27 journals that publish L2 research (N = 327); (2) manual coding of different types of articles (e.g., empirical studies, review papers), data (quantitative, qualitative, mixed), research settings, and authorship patterns (K = 2,024) using the same 27 journals; and (3) bibliometric and submission data such as impact factors, citation counts, and acceptance rates. Descriptive statistics were applied to explore overall quality and prestige ratings as well as publication trends found in each journal. The relationships between those patterns and subjective ratings were also examined. In addition, regression models were built to determine the extent to which perceptions of journal quality and prestige could be explained as a function of journal and article features. We discuss the findings of the study in terms of on-going debates concerning publication practices, study quality, impact factors, journal selection, and the “journal culture” in applied linguistics.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"50 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139150472","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
While writing involves interactions between writers and readers as each considers the other in creating and interpreting texts, research interest in written interaction is a fairly recent development. This paper uses a bibliometric analysis to trace the growing interest in written interaction over the past 30 years from its origins in philosophy, conversation analysis and sociocultural language pedagogy. To do so, we analyzed all 918 articles mentioning writing and interaction in the social science citation index since 1990, dividing the corpus into two periods following the massive increase in interest after 2005. We identify which topics have been most prevalent and which authors, publications, journals and countries most influential over time. The results indicate the growing importance of identity, genre, discipline, metadiscourse and stance, particularly drawing on corpus methods. We also note the participation of authors from more countries in publishing interaction research with the growth of authors from China becoming particularly visible. These findings may interest those working in written discourse analysis and scholarly publishing.
{"title":"Interaction in written texts: A bibliometric study of published research","authors":"Ken Hyland, F. Jiang","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40220","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40220","url":null,"abstract":"While writing involves interactions between writers and readers as each considers the other in creating and interpreting texts, research interest in written interaction is a fairly recent development. This paper uses a bibliometric analysis to trace the growing interest in written interaction over the past 30 years from its origins in philosophy, conversation analysis and sociocultural language pedagogy. To do so, we analyzed all 918 articles mentioning writing and interaction in the social science citation index since 1990, dividing the corpus into two periods following the massive increase in interest after 2005. We identify which topics have been most prevalent and which authors, publications, journals and countries most influential over time. The results indicate the growing importance of identity, genre, discipline, metadiscourse and stance, particularly drawing on corpus methods. We also note the participation of authors from more countries in publishing interaction research with the growth of authors from China becoming particularly visible. These findings may interest those working in written discourse analysis and scholarly publishing.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"311 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139149303","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
It is healthy and normal for an academic discipline to reflect on its publication conventions and practices, its incentive structures, and so forth. As social scientists, it is also natural for us to want to do so in a manner that is systematic and that employs well-established empirical methods, that is, by engaging in bibliometrics (see brief history of bibliometrics in Lei et al., this issue).
一个学科对其出版惯例和实践、激励结构等进行反思是健康和正常的。作为社会科学家，我们自然也希望以一种系统化的方式来反思，并采用成熟的实证方法，即通过文献计量学（参见 Lei 等人的文献计量学简史，本期）。
{"title":"Introduction to the special issue on Introducing bibliometrics in applied linguistics","authors":"Luke Plonsky","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40213","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40213","url":null,"abstract":"It is healthy and normal for an academic discipline to reflect on its publication conventions and practices, its incentive structures, and so forth. As social scientists, it is also natural for us to want to do so in a manner that is systematic and that employs well-established empirical methods, that is, by engaging in bibliometrics (see brief history of bibliometrics in Lei et al., this issue).","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"49 8","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139150498","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
This bibliometric study examined the development of research on the learning and teaching of second language (L2) listening from 1948 to 2020 (73 years). Specifically, the study involved: (1) a search and analysis of all the noun phrases to identify important research topics in the abstracts of the published journal articles on L2 listening over the 73 years (divided into three periods) using self-made Python scripts and (2) three co-citation analyses of the references in these articles regarding highly cited authors, publications, and journals, respectively, via the VOSviewer program. The keyword/phrase analysis produced results that helped uncover and delineate the research trends in L2 listening across the three time periods. The co-citation analyses identified the most highly cited authors, publications, and journals as well as the interrelations among the most highly cited items in each of the three categories illustrated with network maps. The results of the analyses and their implications are discussed.
{"title":"Research on the learning/teaching of L2 listening: A bibliometric review and its implications","authors":"L. Lei, Yaochen Deng, Dilin Liu","doi":"10.14746/ssllt.40216","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40216","url":null,"abstract":"This bibliometric study examined the development of research on the learning and teaching of second language (L2) listening from 1948 to 2020 (73 years). Specifically, the study involved: (1) a search and analysis of all the noun phrases to identify important research topics in the abstracts of the published journal articles on L2 listening over the 73 years (divided into three periods) using self-made Python scripts and (2) three co-citation analyses of the references in these articles regarding highly cited authors, publications, and journals, respectively, via the VOSviewer program. The keyword/phrase analysis produced results that helped uncover and delineate the research trends in L2 listening across the three time periods. The co-citation analyses identified the most highly cited authors, publications, and journals as well as the interrelations among the most highly cited items in each of the three categories illustrated with network maps. The results of the analyses and their implications are discussed.","PeriodicalId":46277,"journal":{"name":"Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching","volume":"54 32","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.4,"publicationDate":"2023-12-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"139150886","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"文学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：