SynthesisFrontiers in psychology2020
An Extensive Knowledge Mapping Review of Measurement and Validity in Language Assessment and SLA Research.
Synthesis in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 9 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
9 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Worldwide trend in research onFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Pooled it
- Culture and the assumptions about appearance and reality: a scientometric look at a century of research.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Pooled it
- A Scientometric Review of Alexithymia: Mapping Thematic and Disciplinary Shifts in Half a Century of Research.Frontiers in psychiatry · 2020Pooled it
- Global trends inFrontiers in immunology · 2024Article
- Exploring research hotspots and future directions in neural tube defects field by bibliometric and bioinformatics analysis.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2024Article
- Global trends in the clinical utilization of exosomes in dermatology: a bibliometric analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Review
- Recent Developments in Autism Genetic Research: A Scientometric Review from 2018 to 2022.Genes · 2022Review
- Bibliometric analysis of hotspots and frontiers in cancer-related fatigue among ovarian cancer survivors.PloS one · 2022Article
- A Scientometric Approach to Review the Role of the Medial Preoptic Area (MPOA) in Parental Behavior.Brain sciences · 2021Review
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study set out to investigate intellectual domains as well as the use of measurement and validation methods in language assessment research and second language acquisition (SLA) published in English in peer-reviewed journals. Using Scopus, we created two datasets: (i) a dataset of core journals consisting of 1,561 articles published in four language assessment journals, and (ii) a dataset of general journals consisting of 3,175 articles on language assessment published in the top journals of SLA and applied linguistics. We applied document co-citation analysis to detect thematically distinct research clusters. Next, we coded citing papers in each cluster based on an analytical framework for measurement and validation. We found that the focus of the core journals was more exclusively on reading and listening comprehension assessment (primary), facets of speaking and writing performance such as raters and validation (secondary), as well as feedback, corpus linguistics, and washback (tertiary). By contrast, the primary focus of assessment research in the general journals was on vocabulary, oral proficiency, essay writing, grammar, and reading. The secondary focus was on affective schemata, awareness, memory, language proficiency, explicit vs. implicit language knowledge, language or semantic awareness, and semantic complexity. With the exception of language proficiency, this second area of focus was absent in the core journals. It was further found that the majority of citing publications in the two datasets did not carry out inference-based validation on their instruments before using them. More research is needed to determine what motivates authors to select and investigate a topic, how thoroughly they cite past research, and what internal (within a field) and external (between fields) factors lead to the sustainability of a Research Topic in language assessment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.