Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate?

Addressing meta-research is contemporaneous with a nascent call in the field of applied linguistics and L2 studies for methodological awareness. Adhering to synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis, we manually examined and coded the methodological orientations and scientific collaboration of...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:System (Linköping) 2021-08, Vol.100, p.102547, Article 102547
Hauptverfasser: Amini Farsani, Mohammad, Jamali, Hamid R., Beikmohammadi, Maryam, Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar, Soleimani, Ladan
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page
container_issue
container_start_page 102547
container_title System (Linköping)
container_volume 100
creator Amini Farsani, Mohammad
Jamali, Hamid R.
Beikmohammadi, Maryam
Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar
Soleimani, Ladan
description Addressing meta-research is contemporaneous with a nascent call in the field of applied linguistics and L2 studies for methodological awareness. Adhering to synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis, we manually examined and coded the methodological orientations and scientific collaboration of 3992 applied linguistics articles published in 18 leading journals from 2009 to 2018 and analyzed their citation impact. The results showed that 178 (4.5%) of articles were non-empirical and the rest were empirical. Among empirical articles, the most prevalent research approach was quantitative (42.6%), followed by mixed-methods research studies (25.9%) and qualitative studies (24.9%). Systematic reviews (2.2%) were the smallest groups. Systematic reviews had a bigger citation impact than the other three research approaches. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the number of citations of the other three approaches (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods). The rates of collaboration in general and international collaboration and interdisciplinary collaboration in particular were significantly higher in quantitative articles than the articles of other research approaches. Education and psychology were two disciplines that had the highest rate of collaboration with applied linguistics researchers.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.system.2021.102547
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2562927796</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0346251X21001019</els_id><sourcerecordid>2562927796</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b1358fb52a855ed61119373ceb163cfaaca3529855979ffe93971ec6565578c43</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UcFq3DAQFaGFbJP-QQ-CXOOtJVmWlUNKCW1TSOglIb0JWRpnZ_FaW0kb2H_Jx1a7LuTW08C8N2_mzSPkE6uXrGbt5_Uy7VOGzZLXnJUWl406IQvWKV0J3vF3ZFGLpq24ZL9PyYeU1nVdN1qJBXm9h7wKPozhGZ0daYgIU7YZw5QuqXXWwwYddfjWmzxN7sDC4YCEcbR9iEeY4kTtdjsieDri9LzDlNGlK_q0spn6QCMksNGtaNpPeQUJ01Gvx37EsIEcC7uI-HJLhi_n5P1gxwQf_9Uz8vj928PNbXX368fPm693lROiyVXPhOyGXnLbSQm-ZYxpoYSDnrXCDba4EJLrAmqlhwG00IqBa2UrpepcI87Ixay7jeHPDlI267CLU1lpuGy55krptrCameViSCnCYLYRNzbuDavNIQezNnMO5pCDmXMoY9fzGBQHLwjRHL_nwGMEl40P-H-Bv1Y9lwg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2562927796</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate?</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Amini Farsani, Mohammad ; Jamali, Hamid R. ; Beikmohammadi, Maryam ; Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar ; Soleimani, Ladan</creator><creatorcontrib>Amini Farsani, Mohammad ; Jamali, Hamid R. ; Beikmohammadi, Maryam ; Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar ; Soleimani, Ladan</creatorcontrib><description>Addressing meta-research is contemporaneous with a nascent call in the field of applied linguistics and L2 studies for methodological awareness. Adhering to synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis, we manually examined and coded the methodological orientations and scientific collaboration of 3992 applied linguistics articles published in 18 leading journals from 2009 to 2018 and analyzed their citation impact. The results showed that 178 (4.5%) of articles were non-empirical and the rest were empirical. Among empirical articles, the most prevalent research approach was quantitative (42.6%), followed by mixed-methods research studies (25.9%) and qualitative studies (24.9%). Systematic reviews (2.2%) were the smallest groups. Systematic reviews had a bigger citation impact than the other three research approaches. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the number of citations of the other three approaches (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods). The rates of collaboration in general and international collaboration and interdisciplinary collaboration in particular were significantly higher in quantitative articles than the articles of other research approaches. Education and psychology were two disciplines that had the highest rate of collaboration with applied linguistics researchers.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0346-251X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1879-3282</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.system.2021.102547</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Elsevier Ltd</publisher><subject>Applied linguistics ; Bibliometric analysis ; Bibliometrics ; Citation impact ; Collaboration ; Linguistics ; Methodological orientations ; Psychology ; Qualitative research ; Scientific collaboration</subject><ispartof>System (Linköping), 2021-08, Vol.100, p.102547, Article 102547</ispartof><rights>2021</rights><rights>Copyright Elsevier Science Ltd. Aug 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b1358fb52a855ed61119373ceb163cfaaca3529855979ffe93971ec6565578c43</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b1358fb52a855ed61119373ceb163cfaaca3529855979ffe93971ec6565578c43</cites><orcidid>0000-0003-1232-6473 ; 0000-0002-9248-5054</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102547$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3548,27922,27923,45993</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Amini Farsani, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jamali, Hamid R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beikmohammadi, Maryam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soleimani, Ladan</creatorcontrib><title>Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate?</title><title>System (Linköping)</title><description>Addressing meta-research is contemporaneous with a nascent call in the field of applied linguistics and L2 studies for methodological awareness. Adhering to synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis, we manually examined and coded the methodological orientations and scientific collaboration of 3992 applied linguistics articles published in 18 leading journals from 2009 to 2018 and analyzed their citation impact. The results showed that 178 (4.5%) of articles were non-empirical and the rest were empirical. Among empirical articles, the most prevalent research approach was quantitative (42.6%), followed by mixed-methods research studies (25.9%) and qualitative studies (24.9%). Systematic reviews (2.2%) were the smallest groups. Systematic reviews had a bigger citation impact than the other three research approaches. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the number of citations of the other three approaches (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods). The rates of collaboration in general and international collaboration and interdisciplinary collaboration in particular were significantly higher in quantitative articles than the articles of other research approaches. Education and psychology were two disciplines that had the highest rate of collaboration with applied linguistics researchers.</description><subject>Applied linguistics</subject><subject>Bibliometric analysis</subject><subject>Bibliometrics</subject><subject>Citation impact</subject><subject>Collaboration</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Methodological orientations</subject><subject>Psychology</subject><subject>Qualitative research</subject><subject>Scientific collaboration</subject><issn>0346-251X</issn><issn>1879-3282</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UcFq3DAQFaGFbJP-QQ-CXOOtJVmWlUNKCW1TSOglIb0JWRpnZ_FaW0kb2H_Jx1a7LuTW08C8N2_mzSPkE6uXrGbt5_Uy7VOGzZLXnJUWl406IQvWKV0J3vF3ZFGLpq24ZL9PyYeU1nVdN1qJBXm9h7wKPozhGZ0daYgIU7YZw5QuqXXWwwYddfjWmzxN7sDC4YCEcbR9iEeY4kTtdjsieDri9LzDlNGlK_q0spn6QCMksNGtaNpPeQUJ01Gvx37EsIEcC7uI-HJLhi_n5P1gxwQf_9Uz8vj928PNbXX368fPm693lROiyVXPhOyGXnLbSQm-ZYxpoYSDnrXCDba4EJLrAmqlhwG00IqBa2UrpepcI87Ixay7jeHPDlI267CLU1lpuGy55krptrCameViSCnCYLYRNzbuDavNIQezNnMO5pCDmXMoY9fzGBQHLwjRHL_nwGMEl40P-H-Bv1Y9lwg</recordid><startdate>202108</startdate><enddate>202108</enddate><creator>Amini Farsani, Mohammad</creator><creator>Jamali, Hamid R.</creator><creator>Beikmohammadi, Maryam</creator><creator>Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar</creator><creator>Soleimani, Ladan</creator><general>Elsevier Ltd</general><general>Elsevier Science Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7T9</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1232-6473</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9248-5054</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202108</creationdate><title>Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate?</title><author>Amini Farsani, Mohammad ; Jamali, Hamid R. ; Beikmohammadi, Maryam ; Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar ; Soleimani, Ladan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c334t-b1358fb52a855ed61119373ceb163cfaaca3529855979ffe93971ec6565578c43</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>Applied linguistics</topic><topic>Bibliometric analysis</topic><topic>Bibliometrics</topic><topic>Citation impact</topic><topic>Collaboration</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Methodological orientations</topic><topic>Psychology</topic><topic>Qualitative research</topic><topic>Scientific collaboration</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Amini Farsani, Mohammad</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Jamali, Hamid R.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Beikmohammadi, Maryam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Soleimani, Ladan</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>System (Linköping)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Amini Farsani, Mohammad</au><au>Jamali, Hamid R.</au><au>Beikmohammadi, Maryam</au><au>Ghorbani, Babak Daneshvar</au><au>Soleimani, Ladan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate?</atitle><jtitle>System (Linköping)</jtitle><date>2021-08</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>100</volume><spage>102547</spage><pages>102547-</pages><artnum>102547</artnum><issn>0346-251X</issn><eissn>1879-3282</eissn><abstract>Addressing meta-research is contemporaneous with a nascent call in the field of applied linguistics and L2 studies for methodological awareness. Adhering to synthetic techniques and bibliometric analysis, we manually examined and coded the methodological orientations and scientific collaboration of 3992 applied linguistics articles published in 18 leading journals from 2009 to 2018 and analyzed their citation impact. The results showed that 178 (4.5%) of articles were non-empirical and the rest were empirical. Among empirical articles, the most prevalent research approach was quantitative (42.6%), followed by mixed-methods research studies (25.9%) and qualitative studies (24.9%). Systematic reviews (2.2%) were the smallest groups. Systematic reviews had a bigger citation impact than the other three research approaches. However, there was no statistically significant difference between the number of citations of the other three approaches (i.e., quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods). The rates of collaboration in general and international collaboration and interdisciplinary collaboration in particular were significantly higher in quantitative articles than the articles of other research approaches. Education and psychology were two disciplines that had the highest rate of collaboration with applied linguistics researchers.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Elsevier Ltd</pub><doi>10.1016/j.system.2021.102547</doi><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1232-6473</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9248-5054</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0346-251X
ispartof System (Linköping), 2021-08, Vol.100, p.102547, Article 102547
issn 0346-251X
1879-3282
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2562927796
source ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Applied linguistics
Bibliometric analysis
Bibliometrics
Citation impact
Collaboration
Linguistics
Methodological orientations
Psychology
Qualitative research
Scientific collaboration
title Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate?
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-14T00%3A25%3A12IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Methodological%20orientations,%20academic%20citations,%20and%20scientific%20collaboration%20in%20applied%20linguistics:%20What%20do%20research%20synthesis%20and%20bibliometrics%20indicate?&rft.jtitle=System%20(Link%C3%B6ping)&rft.au=Amini%20Farsani,%20Mohammad&rft.date=2021-08&rft.volume=100&rft.spage=102547&rft.pages=102547-&rft.artnum=102547&rft.issn=0346-251X&rft.eissn=1879-3282&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.system.2021.102547&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2562927796%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2562927796&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_els_id=S0346251X21001019&rfr_iscdi=true