第二语言习得研究中的元分析

IF 1.2 4区 教育学 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
R. Ellis
{"title":"第二语言习得研究中的元分析","authors":"R. Ellis","doi":"10.1075/JSLS.00002.ELL","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Meta-analysis has become increasingly popular in second language acquisition research (SLA) and has provided valuable summative\n information about a number of key areas. There are, however, dangers. This article examines a number of key issues that need to be\n considered in conducting a meta-analysis – inclusiveness, the heterogeneity of language learners, the definition of the\n independent and dependent variables, the need to consider alternative explanations of observed effects, the importance of\n examining the quality of the studies included in the analysis, and the apples and oranges problem. These issues are illustrated in\n a discussion of number of SLA meta-analyses (e.g. Norris and Ortega, 2000; Plonsky, 2011; Qureshi, 2016; Spada and Tomita, 2010). The article concludes by suggesting a number of factors that\n need to be considered in deciding whether to conduct a meta-analysis and when carrying one out. I argue the need for systematic\n reviews but suggest that these can often best present their findings in narrative form rather than statistically. I also suggest\n that a preliminary narrative account of the findings of s systematic review can indicate whether a meta-analysis is\n appropriate.","PeriodicalId":29903,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Second Language Studies","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.2000,"publicationDate":"2018-08-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"8","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-analysis in second language acquisition research\",\"authors\":\"R. Ellis\",\"doi\":\"10.1075/JSLS.00002.ELL\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Meta-analysis has become increasingly popular in second language acquisition research (SLA) and has provided valuable summative\\n information about a number of key areas. There are, however, dangers. This article examines a number of key issues that need to be\\n considered in conducting a meta-analysis – inclusiveness, the heterogeneity of language learners, the definition of the\\n independent and dependent variables, the need to consider alternative explanations of observed effects, the importance of\\n examining the quality of the studies included in the analysis, and the apples and oranges problem. These issues are illustrated in\\n a discussion of number of SLA meta-analyses (e.g. Norris and Ortega, 2000; Plonsky, 2011; Qureshi, 2016; Spada and Tomita, 2010). The article concludes by suggesting a number of factors that\\n need to be considered in deciding whether to conduct a meta-analysis and when carrying one out. I argue the need for systematic\\n reviews but suggest that these can often best present their findings in narrative form rather than statistically. I also suggest\\n that a preliminary narrative account of the findings of s systematic review can indicate whether a meta-analysis is\\n appropriate.\",\"PeriodicalId\":29903,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Second Language Studies\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-08-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"8\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Second Language Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1075/JSLS.00002.ELL\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Second Language Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1075/JSLS.00002.ELL","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 8

摘要

元分析在第二语言习得研究中越来越受欢迎,并为许多关键领域提供了有价值的总结性信息。然而,也存在危险。本文探讨了在进行荟萃分析时需要考虑的一些关键问题——包容性、语言学习者的异质性、自变量和因变量的定义、考虑观察到的效果的替代解释的必要性、检查分析中研究质量的重要性、,还有苹果和桔子的问题。这些问题在对许多SLA荟萃分析的讨论中得到了说明(例如,Norris和Ortega,2000年;Plonsky,2011年;Qureshi,2016年;Spada和Tomita,2010年)。文章最后提出了在决定是否进行荟萃分析以及何时进行荟萃分析时需要考虑的一些因素。我认为有必要进行系统的审查,但我认为这些审查通常可以最好地以叙述的形式而不是统计的形式来呈现他们的发现。我还建议,对系统综述的结果进行初步叙述可以表明荟萃分析是否合适。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Meta-analysis in second language acquisition research
Meta-analysis has become increasingly popular in second language acquisition research (SLA) and has provided valuable summative information about a number of key areas. There are, however, dangers. This article examines a number of key issues that need to be considered in conducting a meta-analysis – inclusiveness, the heterogeneity of language learners, the definition of the independent and dependent variables, the need to consider alternative explanations of observed effects, the importance of examining the quality of the studies included in the analysis, and the apples and oranges problem. These issues are illustrated in a discussion of number of SLA meta-analyses (e.g. Norris and Ortega, 2000; Plonsky, 2011; Qureshi, 2016; Spada and Tomita, 2010). The article concludes by suggesting a number of factors that need to be considered in deciding whether to conduct a meta-analysis and when carrying one out. I argue the need for systematic reviews but suggest that these can often best present their findings in narrative form rather than statistically. I also suggest that a preliminary narrative account of the findings of s systematic review can indicate whether a meta-analysis is appropriate.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
10.00%
发文量
9
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信