Abbuhl, R. (2018). Research replication. In Phakiti, A., De Costa, P. I., Plonsky, L., & Starfield, S. (Eds.), The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology (pp. 145–162). Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Abbuhl, R., Mackey, A., Ziegler, N., & Amoroso, L. (2018). Interaction and learning grammar. In Liontas, J. I. (Ed.), The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching (pp. 1–7). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Abrahamsson, N. & Hyltenstam, K. (2008). The robustness of aptitude effects in near-native second language acquisition. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 30(4), 481–509.Google Scholar

Albert, Á. & Kormos, J. (2004). Creativity and narrative task performance: An exploratory study. Language Learning, 54(2), 277–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Albert, Á. & Kormos, J. (2011). Creativity and narrative task performance: An exploratory study. Language Learning, 61(Suppl. 1), 73–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Alcón-Soler, E. (2017). Pragmatic development during study abroad: An analysis of Spanish teenagers’ request strategies in English emails. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 77–92.Google Scholar

Allwright, R. L. (1984). Why don’t learners learn what teachers teach? The interaction hypothesis. In Singleton, D. M. and Little, D. G. (Eds.), Language Learning in Formal and Informal Contexts (pp. 3–18). IRAAL.Google Scholar

Allwright, R. L. (1987). Classroom observation: Problems and possibilities. In Das, B. K. (Ed.), Patterns of Classroom Interaction in Southeast Asia (pp. 88–102). SEAMEO Regional Language Centre.Google Scholar

Altarriba, J., Kroll, J. F., Sholl, A., & Rayner, K. (1996). The influence of lexical and conceptual constraints on reading mixed-language sentences: Evidence from eye fixations and naming times. Memory and Cognition, 24(4), 477–492.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Ammar, A. & Spada, N. (2006). One size fits all? Recasts, prompts, and L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 28(4), 543–574.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Andrews, E. (2019). Cognitive neuroscience and multilingualism. In Schwieter, J. W. (Ed.), The Handbook of the Neuroscience of Multilingualism (pp. 19–47). John Wiley and Sons.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Awwad, A. & Tavakoli, P. (2019). Task complexity, language proficiency and working memory: Interaction effects on second language speech performance. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching.Google Scholar

Azkarai, A. & García Mayo, M. D. P. (2015). Task-modality and L1 use in EFL oral interaction. Language Teaching Research, 19(5), 550–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Azkarai, A. & García Mayo, M. D. P. (2016). Task repetition effects on L1 use in EFL child task-based interaction. Language Teaching Research, 21, 480–495.Google Scholar

Baddeley, A. D. (1986). Working Memory. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Bailey, K. M., Nunan, D., & Swan, M. (Eds.) (1996). Voices From the Language Classroom: Qualitative Research in Second Language Education. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Baralt, M. (2015). Working memory capacity, cognitive complexity and L2 recasts in online language teaching. In Wen, Z., Mota, M. B., & McNeill, A. (Eds.), Working Memory in Second Language Acquisition and Processing (pp. 248–269). Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Barberena, L. S., Brasil, B. C., Melo, R. M., Mezzomo, C. L., Mota, H. B., & Keske-Soares, M. (2014). Ultrasound applicability in speech language pathology and audiology. CoDAS, 26(6), 520–530.Google Scholar

Barkhuizen, G. P., Benson, P., & Chik, A. (2014). Narrative Inquiry in Language Teaching and Learning Research. Routledge.Google Scholar

Bax, S. (2003). The end of CLT: A context approach to language teaching. ELT Journal, 57, 278–287.Google Scholar

Benson, P. (2015). Commenting to learn: Evidence of language and intercultural learning in comments on YouTube videos. Language Learning and Technology, 19(3), 88–99.Google Scholar

Beretta, A. & Davies, A. (1985). Evaluation of the Bangalore Project. ELT Journal, 39(2), 121–127.Google Scholar

Bialystok, E. (2015). Bilingualism and the development of executive function: The role of attention. Child Development Perspectives, 9(2), 117–121.Google Scholar

Bialystok, E., Kroll, J. F., Green, D. W., MacWhinney, B., & Craik, F. I. (2015). Publication bias and the validity of evidence: What’s the connection? Psychological Science, 26(6), 944–946.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Block, D. (2000). Problematizing interview data: Voices in the mind’s machine? TESOL Quarterly, 34(4), 757–763.Google Scholar

Block, D. (2010). Researching language and identity. In Paltridge, B. & Phakiti, A. (Eds.), Continuum Companion to Research Methods in Applied Linguistics (pp. 337–349). Continuum International Publishing Group.Google Scholar

Blum-Kulka, S. (1982). Learning to say what you mean in a second language: A study of the speech act performance of learners of Hebrew as a second language. Applied Linguistics, 3, 29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bock, K. (1990). Structure in language: Creating form in talk. American Psychologist, 45(11), 1221–1236.Google Scholar

Bock, K. (1995). Sentence production: From mind to mouth. In Miller, J. L. & Eimas, P. D. (Eds.), Handbook of Perception and Cognition: Speech, Language, and Communication (2nd ed., pp. 181–216). Academic Press.Google Scholar

Bock, K. & Griffin, Z. M. (2000). The persistence of structural priming: Transient activation or implicit learning? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 129(2), 177–192.Google Scholar

Borenstein, M., Hedges, L., Higgins, J., & Rothstein, H. (2005). Comprehensive Meta-Analysis [computer software]. Biostat.Google Scholar

Bowles, M. (2010). Features that make a task amenable to think-aloud: A meta-analysis of studies investigating the validity of think-alouds on verbal tasks. In The Think-Aloud Controversy in Second Language Research (pp. 67–112). Routledge.Google Scholar

Brown, D. (2016). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 436–458. 10.1177/1362168814563200Google Scholar

Bruer, J. T. (2006). Points of view: On the implications of neuroscience research for science teaching and learning: Are there any? A skeptical theme and variations: The primacy of psychology in the science of learning. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 5(2), 104–110. DOI:10.1187/cbe.06-03-0153Google Scholar

Brunfaut, T. & Révész, A. (2015). The role of task and listener characteristics in second language listening. TESOL Quarterly, 49(1), 141–168.Google Scholar

Bryfonski, L. (2019a). “Is seeing believing? The role of ultrasound tongue imaging and oral corrective feedback in L2 pronunciation development,” unpublished manuscript, Department of Linguistics, Georgetown University, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Bryfonski, L. (2019b). Task-based teacher training: Implementation and evaluation in Central American bilingual schools(Publication No. 13811093), [Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University]. ProQuest Dissertations Publishing.Google Scholar

Bryfonski, L. & Ma, X. (2019). Effects of implicit versus explicit feedback on Mandarin tone acquisition in a SCMC learning environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–28.Google Scholar

Bryfonski, L. & McKay, T. (2017). TBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 1–30.Google Scholar

Bryfonski, L. & Sanz, C. (2018). Opportunities for corrective feedback during study abroad: A mixed methods approach. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 1–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Bygate, M. (2001). Effects of task repetition on the structure and control of oral language. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing (pp. 23–48). Longman.Google Scholar

Bygate, M. (Ed.) (2015). Domains and Directions in the Development of TBLT: A Decade of Plenaries from the International Conference. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Bygate, M., Norris, J., & Van den Branden, K. (2015). Task‐based language teaching. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Calvert, M. & Sheen, Y. (2015). Task-based language learning and teaching: An action-research study. Language Teaching Research, 19(2), 226–244.Google Scholar

Carroll, J. B. & Sapon, S. M. (1959). Modern Language Aptitude Test. Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar

Carroll, S. & Swain, M. (1993). Explicit and implicit negative feedback: An empirical study of the learning of linguistic generalizations. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 15(3), 357–386.Google Scholar

Chaudron, C. (2000). Contrasting approaches to classroom research: Qualitative and quantitative analysis of language use and learning. Second Language Studies, 19, 1–56.Google Scholar

Cleophas, T. & Zwinderman, A. (2017). Modern Meta-Analysis Review and Update of Methodologies. Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar

Cobb, M. (2010). Meta-analysis of the effectiveness of task-based interaction in form-focused instruction of adult learners in foreign and second language teaching [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of San Francisco.Google Scholar

Coderre, E. L., Smith, J. F., Van Heuven, W. J., and Horwitz, B. (2016). The functional overlap of executive control and language processing in bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(3), 471–488.Google Scholar

Cohen, J. (1960). A coefficient of agreement for nominal scales. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 20, 37–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Coombe, C. and Davidson, P. (2015). Constructing questionnaires. In Brown, J. D. and Coombe, C. A. (Eds.), The Cambridge Guide to Research in Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 217–223). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Cooper, H. (2017). Research Synthesis and Meta-Analysis: A Step-By-Step Approach (5th ed.). SAGE.Google Scholar

Cornillie, F., Van Den Noortgate, W., Van den Branden, K., & Desmet, P. (2017). Examining focused L2 practice: From in vitro to in vivo. Language Learning and Technology, 21(1), 121–145.Google Scholar

Cowan, N., Towse, J. N., Hamilton, Z., Saults, J. S., Elliott, E. M., Lacey, J. F., Moreno, M. V., & Hitch, G. J. (2003). Children’s working-memory processes: A response-timing analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 132(1), 113–132.Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. (2015). A Concise Introduction to Mixed Methods Research. Sage.Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approaches (5th ed.). Sage.Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research. Sage.Google Scholar

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., & Garrett, A. L. (2008). Methodological issues in conducting mixed methods research designs. In Bergman, M. (Ed.), Advances in Mixed Methods Research (pp. 66–84). Sage Publishing.Google Scholar

Crookes, G. (1993). Action research for second language teaching: Going beyond teacher research. Applied Linguistics, 14, 130–142.Google Scholar

Culpeper, J., Mackey, A., & Taguchi, N. (2018). Second Language Pragmatics: From Theory to Research. Routledge.Google Scholar

Daneman, M. and Case, R. (1981). Syntactic form, semantic complexity, and short-term memory: Influences on children’s acquisition of new linguistic structures. Developmental Psychology, 17(4), 367–78.Google Scholar

de Bruin, A., Treccani, B., & Della Sala, S. (2015). Cognitive advantage in bilingualism: An example of publication bias? Psychological Science, 26(1), 99–107.Google Scholar

Dewey, D., Belnap, R., & Steffen, P. (2018). Anxiety: Stress, foreign language classroom anxiety, and enjoyment during study abroad in Amman, Jordan. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 140–161.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z. (2003). Questionnaires in Second Language Research Construction, Administration, and Processing. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z. (2010). Questionnaires in Second Language Research: Construction, Administration, and Processing (2nd ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z. & Csizér, K. (2012). How to design and analyze surveys in second language acquisition research. In Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M.. (Eds.), Research Methods in Second Language Acquisition: A Practical Guide (pp. 74–94). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Dörnyei, Z. & Skehan, P. (2005). Individual differences in L2 learning. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 589–630). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Doughty, C. (2018). Cognitive language aptitude. Language Learning, 69, 101–126.Google Scholar

Doughty, C. J., Bunting, M. F., Campbell, S. G., Bowles, A. R., & Haarmann, H. (2007). The development of the High-Level Language Aptitude Battery. Center for Advanced Study of Language Technical Report (TTO 2105 M. 4). University of Maryland.Google Scholar

Doughty, C. & Varela, E. (1998). Communicative focus-on-form. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition (pp. 114–138). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Duff, P. (2012). Identity, agency, and second language acquisition. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 410–426). Routledge.Google Scholar

Dussias, P. E., Valdés Kroff, J. R., Beatty‐Martínez, A. L., & Johns, M. A. (2019). What language experience tells us about cognition: Variable input and interactional contexts affect bilingual sentence processing. In Schwieter, J. W. (Ed.), The Handbook of the Neuroscience of Multilingualism (pp. 467–484). John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Edwards, A. W. F. (1972). Likelihood: An Account of the Statistical Concept of Likelihood and Its Application to Scientific Inference. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Egi, T. (2010). Uptake, modified output, and learner perceptions of recasts: Learner responses as language awareness. The Modern Language Journal, 94, 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Ellis, R. (2000). Task-based research and language pedagogy. Language Teaching Research, 4(3), 193–220.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2003). Task-Based Language Learning and Teaching. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2008). A typology of written corrective feedback types. ELT journal, 63(2), 97–107.Google Scholar

Ellis, R. (2018). Taking the critics to task: The case for task-based teaching. In Walker, I., Chan, D., Nagami, M., & Bourguignon, C. (Eds.), New Perspectives on the Development of Communicative and Related Competence in Foreign Language Education (pp. 103–117). De Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar

Ellis, R., Basturkmen, H., & Loewen, S. (2001). Learner uptake in communicative ESL lessons. Language Learning, 51(2), 281–318.Google Scholar

Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019). Task-Based Language Teaching: Theory and Practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Erard, M. (2014). Secret military test, coming soon to your Spanish class: A powerful, precise language aptitude test is entering civilian life. Nautilus, 12. Retrieved from https://bit.ly/2QHYCDDGoogle Scholar

Fabre, D., Hueber, T., Girin, L., Alameda-Pineda, X., & Badin, P. (2017). Automatic animation of an articulatory tongue model from ultrasound images of the vocal tract. Speech Communication, 93, 63–75.Google Scholar

Faretta-Stutenberg, M. & Morgan-Short, K. (2018a). Contributions of initial proficiency and language use to second-language development during study abroad: Behavioral and event-related potential evidence. In Sanz, C. & Morales-Front, A. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Study Abroad Research and Practice (pp. 421–435). Routledge.Google Scholar

Faretta-Stutenberg, M. & Morgan-Short, K. (2018b). The interplay of individual differences and context of learning in behavioral and neurocognitive second language development. Second Language Research, 34(1), 67–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Fetters, M. D. & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2019). A checklist of mixed methods elements in a submission for advancing the methodology of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(4), 414–423.Google Scholar

Fortune, T. & Ju, Z. (2017). Assessing and exploring the oral proficiency of young Mandarin immersion learners. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 264–287. 10.1017/S0267190517000150Google Scholar

Foster, P. & Skehan, P. (1996). The influence of planning and task type on second language performance. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 18(3), 299–323.Google Scholar

Frenck-Mestre, C. (2005). Eye-movement recording as a tool for studying syntactic processing in a second language: A review of methodologies and experimental findings. Second Language Research, 21(2), 175–198.Google Scholar

Fukuya, Y. J. & Zhang, Y. (2002). Effects of recasts of EFL learners’ acquisition of pragmalinguistic conventions of request. Second Language Studies, 21(1), 1–47.Google Scholar

García Mayo, M. D. P. & Alcón Soler, E. (2013). Negotiated input and output / interaction. In Herschensohn, J. & Young-Scholten, M. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 209–229). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

García Mayo, M. D. P. & Labandibar, U. (2017). The use of models as written corrective feedback in English as a foreign language (EFL) writing. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 37, 110–127.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. (1997). Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner. Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. (2010). Interactionist perspectives on second language acquisition. In Kaplan, R. B. (Ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Applied Linguistics (2nd ed., pp. 217–231). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. (2017). Input, Interaction, and the Second Language Learner (2nd ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M., Behney, J. N., & Uzum, B. (2013). Inhibitory control, working memory, and L2 interaction. In Droździał-Szelest, K. & Pawlak, M. (Eds.), Psycholinguistic and Sociolinguistic Perspectives on Second Language Learning (pp. 91–114). Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2005). Stimulated Recall Methodology in Second Language Research (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2006). Input, interaction, and output: An overview. AILA Review, 19(1), 3–17.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2015). Input, interaction and output in second language acquisition. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition (2nd ed., pp. 180–206). Routledge.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. & Mackey, A. (2017). Stimulated Recall Methodology in Applied Linguistics and L2 Research. Routledge.Google Scholar

Gass, S. M. & Varonis, E. M. (1989). Incorporated repairs in nonnative discourse. In Eisenstein, M. (Ed.), Variation and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 71–86). Springer.Google Scholar

Gick, B., Bernhardt, B., Bacsfalvi, P., & Wilson, I. (2008). Ultrasound imaging applications in second language acquisition. In Hansen Edwards, J. G. & Zampini, M. L. (Eds.), Phonology and Second Language Acquisition (pp. 315–328). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Godfroid, A. (2019). Eye Tracking in Second Language Acquisition: A Research Synthesis and Methodological Guide. Routledge.Google Scholar

Goetze, J. (2018). Linking cognition and emotion: An appraisal study of foreign language teacher anxiety [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Georgetown University.Google Scholar

Goo, J. (2012). Corrective feedback and working memory capacity in interaction-driven L2 learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34(3), 445–474.Google Scholar

Goo, J. & Mackey, A. (2013a). The case against the case against recasts. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 127–165.Google Scholar

Goo, J. & Mackey, A. (2013b). The case for methodological rigor: A Response to Lyster and Ranta. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), E1. 10.1017/S0272263113000028Google Scholar

Gordon, C. (2012). Beyond the observer’s paradox: The audio-recorder as a resource for the display of identity. Qualitative Research, 13(4), 299–317Google Scholar

Grigorenko, E. L., Sternberg, R. J., & Ehrman, M. E. (2000). A theory‐based approach to the measurement of foreign language learning ability: The Canal‐F theory and test. The Modern Language Journal, 84(3), 390–405.Google Scholar

Guilford, J. P. (1967). The Nature of Human Intelligence. McGraw Hill.Google Scholar

Gurevitch, J., Koricheva, J., Nakagawa, S., & Stewart, G. (2018). Meta-analysis and the science of research synthesis. Nature, 555(7695), 175–182.Google Scholar

Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016a). Factors influencing Spanish instructors’ in-class feedback decisions. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1) 255–275.Google Scholar

Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016b). Spanish instructors’ operationalization and interpretation of task complexity and sequencing in non-experimental foreign language lessons. The Language Learning Journal, 44(4), 467–486.Google Scholar

Gurzynski-Weiss, L. & Plonsky, L. (2017). Look who’s interacting: A scoping review of research involving non-teacher/non-peer interlocutors. In Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (Ed.), Expanding Individual Difference Research in the Interaction Approach: Investigating Learners, Instructors, and Other Interlocutors (pp. 305–324). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Harrington, M. & Sawyer, M. (1992). L2 working memory capacity and L2 reading skill. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 14(1), 25–38.Google Scholar

Hashemi, M. & Babii, E. (2013). Mixed methods research: Toward new research designs in applied linguistics. The Modern Language Journal, 97(4), 828–852.Google Scholar

Hassanzadeh, M., Marefat, F., & Ramezani, A. (2019). The impact of single versus multiple recasts on L2 learners’ implicit and explicit knowledge. Heliyon, 5(5), e01748.Google Scholar

Hoff, E. (Ed.) (2011). Research Methods in Child Language: A Practical Guide. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Hyltenstam, K. & Abrahamsson, N. (2003). Maturational constraints in SLA. In Doughty, C. J. & Long, M. H. (Eds.), The Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 539–588). Blackwell.Google Scholar

Indrarathne, B. & Kormos, J. (2018). The role of working memory in processing L2 input: Insights from eye-tracking. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(2), 355–374.Google Scholar

Ionin, T. & Zyzik, E. (2014). Judgment and interpretation tasks in second language research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 37–64.Google Scholar

Jackson, D. O. & Suethanapornkul, S. (2013). The cognition hypothesis: A synthesis and meta-analysis of research on second language task complexity. Language Learning, 63(2), 330–367.Google Scholar

Jang, E., Wagner, M., & Park, G. (2014). Mixed methods research in language testing and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 123–153.Google Scholar

Jegerski, J. & VanPatten, B. (2013). Research Methods in Second Language Psycholinguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar

Jeong, H., Sugiura, M., Sassa, Y., Wakusawa, K., Horie, K., Sato, S., & Kawashima, R. (2010). Learning second language vocabulary: Neural dissociation of situation-based learning and text-based learning. Neuroimage, 50(2), 802–809.Google Scholar

Jeong, H., Sugiura, M., Suzuki, W., Sassa, Y., Hashizume, H., & Kawashima, R. (2016). Neural correlates of second-language communication and the effect of language anxiety. Neuropsychologia, 84, e2–e12.Google Scholar

Juffs, A. (2004). Representation, processing, and working memory in a second language. Transactions of the Philological Society, 102(2), 199–225.Google Scholar

Juffs, A. & Harrington, M. (2011). Aspects of working memory in L2 learning. Language Teaching, 44(2), 137–166.Google Scholar

Kartchava, E. (2016). Learners’ beliefs about corrective feedback in the language classroom: Perspectives from two international contexts. TESL Canada Journal, 33(2), 19–45. 1018806/tesl.v33i2.1233Google Scholar

Katz, A. N. & Hussey, K. A. (2011). Psycholinguistics. In Runco, M. & Pritzker, S. (Eds.), Encyclopedia of Creativity (2nd ed., pp. 271–278). Elsevier.Google Scholar

Keck, C. M., Iberri-Shea, G., Tracy-Ventura, N., & Wa-Mbaleka, S. (2006). Investigating the empirical link between task-based interaction and acquisition: A meta-analysis. In Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (Eds.), Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 91–131). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Kim, Y., Payant, C., & Pearson, P. (2015). The intersection of task-based interaction, task complexity, and working memory: L2 question development through recasts in a laboratory setting. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37, 549–581.Google Scholar

Kim, Y. & Taguchi, N. (2015). Promoting task‐based pragmatics instruction in EFL classroom contexts: The role of task complexity. The Modern Language Journal, 99(4), 656–677.Google Scholar

King, K. & Bigelow, M. (2018). East African transnational adolescents and cross-border education: An argument for local international learning. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 187–193. 10.1017/S0267190518000041Google Scholar

King, K. & Mackey, A. (2016). Research methodology in second language studies: Trends, concerns, and new directions. The Modern Language Journal, 100(Supp. 1), 209–227.Google Scholar

Kinginger, C. & Wu, Q. (2018). Learning Chinese through contextualized language practices in study abroad residence halls: Two case studies. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 38, 102–121.Google Scholar

Kinoshita, S. & Lupker, S. J. (2003). Priming and attentional control of lexical and sublexical pathways in naming: A reevaluation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29(3), 405–415.Google Scholar

Kirkham, S. & Mackey, A. (2015). Research, relationships, and reflexivity: Two case studies of language and identity. Ethics In Applied Linguistics Research (pp. 103–120). Routledge.Google Scholar

Klein, R. A. (2018). Many Labs 2: Investigating variation in replicability across samples and settings. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 1(4), 443–490.Google Scholar

Krashen, S. (1977). Some issues relating to the monitor model. In Brown, H., Yorio, C., & Crymes, R. (Eds.), Teaching and Learning English As a Second Language: Trends in Research and Practice (pp. 144–158). TESOL.Google Scholar

Krashen, S. (1980). The input hypothesis. In Alatis, J. (Ed.), Current Issues in Bilingual Education (pp. 168–180). Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar

Labov, W. (1972). Some principles of linguistic methodology. Language in Society, 1, 97–120.Google Scholar

Lantolf, J., Thorne, S. L., & Poehler, M. (2015). Sociocultural theory and second language development. In VanPatten, B. and Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 207–226). Routledge.Google Scholar

Lardiere, D. (2007). Ultimate Attainment in Second Language Acquisition: A Case Study. Routledge.Google Scholar

Larsen-Freeman, D. & Tedick, D. J. (2016). World language teaching: Thinking differently. In Gitomer, D. & Bell, C. (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (5th ed., pp. 1335–1388). American Educational Research Association.Google Scholar

Laws, K. R. (2016). Psychology, replication, and beyond. BMC Psychology, 4(30), 1–8.Google Scholar

Lee, J. (2018). Task complexity, cognitive load, and L1 speech. Applied Linguistics, 39(3), 506–539.Google Scholar

Lee, V. & Gyogi, E. (2015). The reflective learning journal in the classroom, [Paper presentation]. Annual International Conference on Language Teaching and Learning and Educational Materials Exhibition, Shizuoka City, Japan.Google Scholar

Leeman, J. (2003). Recasts and second language development: Beyond negative evidence. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25(1), 37–63.Google Scholar

Leow, R. & Donatelli, L. (2017). The role of (un)awareness in SLA. Language Teaching, 50(2), 189–211.Google Scholar

Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309–365.Google Scholar

Li, S. (2013). The interactions between the effects of implicit and explicit feedback and individual differences in language analytic ability and working memory. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 634–654.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Li, S. (2015). The associations between language aptitude and second language grammar acquisition: A meta-analytic review of five decades of research. Applied Linguistics, 36, 385–408.Google Scholar

Li, S., Zhu, Y., & Ellis, R. (2016). The effects of the timing of corrective feedback on the acquisition of a new linguistic structure. The Modern Language Journal, 100(1), 276–295.Google Scholar

Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (1990). Focus-on-form and corrective feedback in communicative language teaching: Effects on second language learning. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 12(4), 429–448.Google Scholar

Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 21(4), 861–883.Google Scholar

Lipsey, M. W. & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical Meta-Analysis. Sage.Google Scholar

Llinares, A. & Lyster, R. (2014). The influence of context on patterns of corrective feedback and learner uptake: A comparison of CLIL and immersion classrooms. The Language Learning Journal, 42(2), 181–194.Google Scholar

Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (2018). Interaction and instructed second language acquisition. Language Teaching, 51(3), 285–329.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1980). Input and interaction in second language acquisition [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of California at Los Angeles.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1981). Input, interaction, and second language acquisition. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 379(1), 259–278. 10.1111/j.1749-6632.1981.tb42014.xGoogle Scholar

Long, M. H. (1985). Input and second-language acquisition theory. In Gass, S. M. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 377–393). Newbury House.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (1996). The role of the linguistic environment in second language acquisition. In Ritchie, W. C. & Bhatia, T. K. (Eds.), Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 413–468). Academic Press.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (2000). Focus on form in task-based language teaching. In Lambert, R. & Shohamy, E. (Eds.), Language Policy and Pedagogy: Essays in Honor of A. Ronald Walton (pp. 179–192). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (2015). Second Language Acquisition and Task-Based Language Teaching. John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. (2016). In defense of tasks and TBLT: Non-issues and real issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 5–33.Google Scholar

Long, M. H., & Crookes, G. (1992). Three approaches to task‐based syllabus design. TESOL Quarterly, 26(1), 27–56.Google Scholar

Long, M. H., Lee, J., & Hillman, K. (2019). Task-based language learning. In Malovrh, P. & Benati, A. (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Language Learning (pp. 500–527). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Long, M. H. & Robinson, P. (1998). Focus on form: Theory, research, and practice. In Doughty, C. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Focus on Form in Classroom Second Language Acquisition (pp. 15–41). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Luck, S. J. (2012). Event-related potentials. In Cooper, H., Camic, P. M., Long, D. L., Panter, A. T., Rindskopf, D., & Sher, K. J. (Eds.), APA Handbook of Research Methods in Psychology: Foundations, Planning, Measures, and Psychometrics (Vol. 1, pp. 523–546). American Psychological Association.Google Scholar

Luque, A., Mizyed, N., & Morgan-Short, K. (2018). Event-related potentials reveal evidence for syntactic co-activation in bilingual language processing: A replication of Sanoudaki and Thierry. In López, L. (Ed.), Code-Switching–Experimental Answers to Theoretical Questions: In Honor of Kay González-Vilbazo (pp. 177–194). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. (1998a). Negotiation of form, recasts, and explicit correction in relation to error type and learner repair in immersion classrooms. Language Learning, 48(Suppl. 1), 183–218.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. (1998b). Recasts, repetition, and ambiguity in L2 classroom discourse. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 20(1), 51–81.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. (2004). Differential effects of prompts and recasts in form-focused instruction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 26(3), 399–432.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. (2019). Roles for corrective feedback in second language instruction. In Chapelle, C. A. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (1997). Corrective feedback and learner uptake: Negotiation of form in communicative classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66.Google Scholar

Lyster, R. & Ranta, L. (2013). Counterpoint piece: The case for variety in corrective feedback research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 167–184. 10.1017/S027226311200071XGoogle Scholar

Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265–302.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (1999). Input, interaction, and second language development: An empirical study of question formation in ESL. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 21(4), 557–587.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (2006). Feedback, noticing, and instructed second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 27(3), 405–430.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (2012a). Input, Interaction, and Corrective Feedback in L2 Learning. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (2012b). Why (or why not), when, and how to replicate research. In Porte, G. (Ed.), Replication Research in Applied Linguistics, 34–69. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. (2016). Practice and progression in second language research methods. AILA Review, 27, 80–97.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., Abbuhl, R., & Gass, S. M. (2012). Interactionist approaches. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 7–23). Routledge.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., Adams, R., Stafford, C., & Winke, P. (2010). Exploring the relationship between modified output and working memory capacity. Language Learning, 60(3), 501–533.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (2005). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design (1st ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (2015). Interaction approaches. In VanPatten, B. & Williams, J. (Eds.), Theories in Second Language Acquisition (pp. 180–207). Routledge.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (2016). Second Language Research: Methodology and Design (2nd ed.). Routledge.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (Eds.) (2012). Research Methods in Second Language Acquisition: A Practical Guide. Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., Gass, S. M., & McDonough, K. (2000). How do learners perceive implicit negative feedback? Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 22(4), 471–497.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Collection of Empirical Studies (pp. 407–452). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2012). Interaction approach in second language acquisition. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 2748–2758). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., McDonough, K., Fujii, A., & Tatasumi, T. (2001). Investigating learners’ reports about the L2 classroom. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 39(4), 285–308.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., Park, H. I., Akiyama, Y., & Pipes, A. (2014, March). The role of cognitive creativity in L2 learning processes, [Paper presentation]. Georgetown University Round Table, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Philp, J. (1998). Conversational interaction and second language development: Recasts, responses, and red herrings? The Modern Language Journal, 82(3), 338–356.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., Philp, J., Egi, T., Fujii, A., & Tatsumi, T. (2002). Individual differences in working memory, noticing of interactional feedback, and L2 development. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Individual Differences and Instructed Language Learning (pp. 181–209). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Mackey, A., Philp, J. & Teimouri, Y. (2015, September). The relationships amongst working memory, cognitive creativity and second language production during communicative tasks. Task-Based Language Teaching Conference. Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar

Mackey, A. & Sachs, R. (2012). Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning, 62(3), 704–740.Google Scholar

Mann, W., Sheng, L., & Morgan, G. (2016). Lexical‐semantic organization in bilingually developing deaf children with ASL‐dominant language exposure: Evidence from a repeated meaning association task. Language Learning, 66(4), 872–899. 10.1111/lang.12169Google Scholar

Markee, N. (2017). Are replication studies possible in qualitative second/foreign language classroom research? A call for comparative re-production research. Language Teaching, 50(3), 367–383.Google Scholar

Marsden, E. & Mackey, A. (2014). IRIS: A new resource for second language research. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 4(1), 125–130.Google Scholar

Marsden, E., Mackey, A., & Plonsky, L. (2016). The IRIS repository: Advancing research practice and methodology. In Mackey, A. & Marsden, E. (Eds.), Advancing Methodology and Practice: The IRIS Repository of Instruments for Research Into Second Languages (pp. 1–21). Routledge.Google Scholar

Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D. (2018). Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 68(2), 321–391.Google Scholar

Mathôt, S. (2018). Pupillometry: Psychology, physiology, and function. Journal of Cognition, 1(1), 1–23.Google Scholar

McDonough, K., Crawford, W. J., & Mackey, A. (2015). Creativity and EFL students’ language use during a group problem-solving task. TESOL Quarterly, 49(1), 188–199.Google Scholar

McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (2006). Responses to recasts: Repetitions, primed production, and linguistic development. Language Learning, 56(4), 693–720.Google Scholar

McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (2013). Second Language Interaction in Diverse Educational Contexts. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

McDonough, K. & Trofimovich, P. (2008). Using Priming Methods in Second Language Research. Routledge.Google Scholar

McKinnon, S. (2017). TBLT instructional effects on tonal alignment and pitch range in L2 Spanish imperatives versus declaratives. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(2), 287–317.Google Scholar

Meara, P. (2005). LLAMA Language Aptitude Tests: The Manual. Lognostics.Google Scholar

Menon, V. & Muraleedharan, A. (2016). Salami slicing of data sets: What the young researcher needs to know. Indian Journal of Psychological Medicine, 38(6), 577–578.Google Scholar

Miller, P. C. (2003). The effectiveness of corrective feedback: A meta-analysis [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Purdue University.Google Scholar

Miller, P. C. & Pan, W. (2012). Recasts in the L2 classroom: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 56, 48–59.Google Scholar

Miyake, A. & Friedman, N. P. (1998). Individual differences in second language proficiency: Working memory as language aptitude. In Healy, A. F. & Bourne, L. E. Jr. (Eds.), Foreign Language Learning: Psycholinguistic Studies on Training and Retention (pp. 339–364). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar

Mohades, S. G., Struys, E., Van Schuerbeek, P., Baeken, C., Van De Craen, P., & Luypaert, R. (2014). Age of second language acquisition affects nonverbal conflict processing in children: An fMRI study. Brain and Behavior, 4(5), 626–642.Google Scholar

Morgan-Short, K., Deng, Z., Brill-Schuetz, K. A., Faretta-Stutenberg, M., Wong, P. C., & Wong, F. C. (2015). A view of the neural representation of second language syntax through artificial language learning under implicit contexts of exposure. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 37(2), 383–419.Google Scholar

Morgan-Short, K., Faretta-Stutenberg, M., & Bartlett-Hsu, L. (2015). Contributions of event-related potential research to issues in explicit and implicit second language acquisition. In Rebuschat, P. (Ed.), Implicit and Explicit Learning of Languages (pp. 349–384). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Mouthon, M., Khateb, A., Lazeyras, F., Pegna, A. J., Lee-Jahnke, H., Lehr, C., & Annoni, J. M. (2019). Second-language proficiency modulates the brain language control network in bilingual translators: An event-related fMRI study. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–14.Google Scholar

Nakatsukasa, K. (2016). Efficacy of recasts and gestures on the acquisition of locative prepositions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38, 771–779.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2009). Effects of recasts and elicitations in dyadic interaction and the role of feedback explicitness. Language Learning, 59(2), 411–452.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2016). Anniversary article: Interactional feedback in second language teaching and learning: A synthesis and analysis of current research. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 535–562.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2017). The effectiveness of extensive versus intensive recasts for learning L2 grammar. The Modern Language Journal, 101, 353–368.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. (2019). The effects of recasts versus prompts on immediate uptake and learning of a complex target structure. In DeKeyser, R. M. & Botana, G. P. (Eds.), Doing SLA Research with Implications for the Classroom: Reconciling Methodological Demands and Pedagogical Applicability (pp. 107–126). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.) (2017). Corrective Feedback in Second Language Teaching and Learning: Research, Theory, Applications, Implications. Taylor and Francis.Google Scholar

Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.) (2019). The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Language Learning and Teaching. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Nicklin, C. & Plonsky, L. (2020). Outliers in L2 research: A synthesis and data re-analysis from self-paced reading. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40.Google Scholar

Norris, J. M. (2012). Meta‐analysis. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1–10). John Wiley.Google Scholar

Norris, J. M., Brown, J. D., Hudson, T. D., & Bonk, W. (2002). Examinee abilities and task difficulty in task-based second language performance assessment. Language Testing, 19(4), 395–418.Google Scholar

Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417–528.Google Scholar

Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (Eds.) (2006). Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Nosek, B. A. & Lakens, D. (2014). Registered reports: A method to increase the credibility of published results. Social Psychology, 45(3), 137–141.Google Scholar

Nunan, D. (1993). Action research in language education. In Edge, J. & Richards, K. (Eds.), Teachers Develop, Teachers Research: Papers on Classroom Research and Teacher Development (pp. 39–50). Heinemann International.Google Scholar

Oakley, M. (2019, October). Ultrasound tongue imaging and the acquisition of the French /y/–/u/ contrast, [Paper presentation]. Second Language Research Forum, Montréal, Québec.Google Scholar

Oswald, F. L. & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis in second language acquisition research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 85–110.Google Scholar

Ottó, I. (1998). The relationship between individual differences in learner creativity and language learning success. TESOL Quarterly, 32(4), 763–773.Google Scholar

Owens, M. T. & Tanner, K. D. (2017). Teaching as brain changing: Exploring connections between neuroscience and innovative teaching. CBE–Life Sciences Education, 16(2). 10.1187/cbe.17-01-0005Google Scholar

Paradis, M. (2004). A Neurolinguistic Theory of Bilingualism. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Park, K. (2016). Employing TBLT at a military-service academy in Korea: Learners’ reactions to and necessary adaptation of TBLT. English Teaching, 71(4).Google Scholar

Pandža, N., Karuzis, V., Phillips, I., O’Rourke, P., & Kuchinsky, S. (2020). Neurostimulation and pupillometry: New directions for learning and research in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40.Google Scholar

Parlak, Ö. & Ziegler, N. (2017). The impact of recasts on the development of primary stress in a synchronous computer-mediated environment. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(2), 257–285.Google Scholar

Phakiti, A., De Costa, P. I., Plonsky, L., & Starfield, S. (Eds.) (2018). The Palgrave Handbook of Applied Linguistics Research Methodology. Palgrave.Google Scholar

Pham, M. T., Rajić, A., Greig, J. D., Sargeant, J. M., Papadopoulos, A., & McEwen, S. A. (2014). A scoping review of scoping reviews: Advancing the approach and enhancing the consistency. Research Synthesis Methods, 5(4), 371–385.Google Scholar

Philp, J. (2003). Constraints on “noticing the gap”: Nonnative speakers’ noticing of recasts in NS-NNS interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 25, 99–126. 10.1017/S0272263103000044Google Scholar

Philp, J., Adams, R., & Iwashita, N. (2013). Peer Interaction and Second Language Learning. Routledge.Google Scholar

Pica, T. (1994). Research on negotiation: What does it reveal about second language learning conditions, processes, and outcomes? Language Learning, 44(3), 493–527.Google Scholar

Pica, T., Kanagy, R., & Falodun, J. (1993). Choosing and using communication tasks for second language instruction. In Crookes, G. & Gass, S. M. (Eds.), Tasks and Language Learning: Integrating Theory and Practice (pp. 9–34). Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Pickering, M. J. & Ferreira, V. S. (2008). Structural priming: a critical review. Psychological Bulletin, 134(3), 427–459. 10.1037/0033-2909.134.3.427Google Scholar

Pimsleur, P. (1966). Pimsleur Language Aptitude Battery (PLAB). Harcourt Brace Jovanich.Google Scholar

Pipes, A. (2017, July). Examining cognitive creativity as an interlocutor individual difference [Paper presentation]. AILA Research Network on Interlocutor and Instructor Individual Differences in Cognition and SLA Symposium, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.Google Scholar

Pipes, A. (2019). Examining creativity as an individual difference in second language production [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Georgetown University.Google Scholar

Pliatsikas, C. & Luk, G. (2016). Executive control in bilinguals: A concise review on fMRI studies. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(4), 699–705.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. (2011). The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 61(4), 993–1038.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. (2015). Quantitative considerations for improving replicability in CALL and applied linguistics. CALICO Journal, 32(2), 232–244.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. (2016, February). The N crowd: Sampling practices, internal validity, and generalizability in L2 research, [Conference presentation] University College London, United Kingdom.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. (2017). Quantitative research methods in instructed SLA. In Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (pp. 505–521). Routledge.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Brown, D. (2015). Domain definition and search techniques in meta-analyses of L2 research (Or why 18 meta-analyses of feedback have different results). Second Language Research, 31(2), 267–278. 10.1177/0267658314536436Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61(2), 325–366.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Han, S. (in preparation). Meta-analysis in language testing: A second order review and call for future research. Retrieved from https://lukeplonsky.wordpress.com/projects/Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 73–97.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2012). How to do a meta-analysis. In Mackey, A. & Gass, S. M. (Eds.), Research Methods in Second Language Acquisition: A Practical Guide (pp. 275–295). Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878–912.Google Scholar

Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2015). Meta-analyzing second language research. In Plonsky, L. (Ed.), Advancing Quantitative Methods in Second Language Research (pp. 106–128). Routledge.Google Scholar

Porte, G. (2012). Replication Research in Applied Linguistics. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Porte, G. & McManus, K. (2019). Doing Replication Research in Applied Linguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar

Préfontaine, Y. & Kormos, J. (2015). The relationship between task difficulty and second language fluency in French: A mixed methods approach. The Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 96–112.Google Scholar

Putman, M. S. & Rock, T. (2017). Action Research: Using Strategic Inquiry to Improve Teaching and Learning. Sage Publications.Google Scholar

Qureshi, M. (2016). A meta-analysis: Age and second language grammar acquisition. System, 60, 147–160.Google Scholar

Rebuschat, P. & Williams, J. N. (2012). Implicit and explicit knowledge in second language acquisition. Applied Psycholinguistics, 33(4), 829–856.Google Scholar

Reiterer, S. (Ed.) (2018). Exploring Language Aptitude: Views from Psychology, The Language Sciences, and Cognitive Neuroscience. Springer International Publishing.Google Scholar

Révész, A. (2012). Working memory and the observed effectiveness of recasts on different L2 outcome measures. Language Learning, 62, 93–132.Google Scholar

Révész, A. & Brunfaut, T. (2013). Text characteristics of task input and difficulty in second language listening comprehension. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(1), 31–65.Google Scholar

Révész, A. & Gurzynski-Weiss, L. (2016). Teachers’ perspectives on second language task difficulty: Insights from think-alouds and eye tracking. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 182–204.Google Scholar

Riazi, A. M. (2016). Innovative mixed-methods research: Moving beyond design technicalities to epistemological and methodological realizations. Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 33–49.Google Scholar

Riazi, A. M. (2017). Mixed Methods Research in Language Teaching and Learning. Equinox Publishing.Google Scholar

Riazi, A. M. & Candlin, C. N. (2014). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning: Opportunities, issues, and challenges. Language Teaching, 47(2), 135–173.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (1995). Attention, memory, and the ‘noticing’ hypothesis. Language Learning, 45, 283–331.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (2001). Task complexity, cognitive resources, and syllabus design: A triadic framework for examining task influences on SLA. In Robinson, P. (Ed.), Cognition and Second Language Instruction (pp. 114–127). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (2005). Aptitude and second language acquisition. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 46–73.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. (2007). Task complexity, theory of mind, and intentional reasoning: Effects on L2 speech production, interaction, uptake, and perceptions of task difficulty. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 45(3), 193–213.Google Scholar

Robinson, P. & Gilabert, R. (2012). Task‐based learning: Cognitive underpinnings. In Chapelle, C. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar

Robinson, P., Mackey, A., Gass, S. M., & Schmidt, R. (2012). Attention and awareness in second language acquisition. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), The Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 247–267). Routledge.Google Scholar

Roothooft, H. (2014). The relationship between adult EFL teachers’ oral feedback practices and their beliefs. System, 46(1), 65–79. 10.1016/j.system.2014.07.012.Google Scholar

Rosenthal, R. (1979). File drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–41.Google Scholar

Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment in second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15(1), 1–20.Google Scholar

Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J., & Borenstein, M. (Eds.) (2005). Publication Bias in Meta-Analysis: Prevention, Assessment, and Adjustments. Wiley.Google Scholar

Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (Eds.), Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 133–164). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Sachs, R. & Suh, B‐R. (2007). Textually enhanced recasts, learner awareness, and L2 outcomes in synchronous computer‐mediated interaction. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Collection of Empirical Studies (pp. 199–227). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Sagarra, N. (2007). From CALL to face-to-face interaction: The effect of computer-driven recasts and working memory on L2 development. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Series of Empirical Studies (pp. 229–248). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Saito, K. (2019). Corrective feedback and the development of L2 pronunciation. In Nassaji, H. & Kartchava, E. (Eds.), The Cambridge Handbook of Corrective Feedback in Language Learning and Teaching. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Saito, K., Macmillan, K., Mai, T., Suzukida, Y., Sun, H., Magne, V., Ilkan, M. & Murakami, A. (2020). Open source: Developing, analyzing, and sharing multivariate datasets: Individual differences in L2 learning revisited. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40.Google Scholar

Samuda, V. (2001). Guiding relationships between form and meaning during task performance: The role of the teacher. In Bygate, M., Skehan, P., & Swain, M. (Eds.), Researching Pedagogic Tasks: Second Language Learning, Teaching, and Testing (pp. 119–140). Longman.Google Scholar

Sasayama, S., Malicka, A., & Norris, J. M. (2015). Primary challenges in cognitive task complexity research: Results of a comprehensive research synthesis, [Paper presentation]. International Conference on Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT), Leuven, Belgium.Google Scholar

Sato, R. (2016). Examining high-intermediate Japanese EFL learners’ perception of recasts: Revisiting repair, acknowledgement, and noticing through stimulated recall. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 18, 109–129.Google Scholar

Sato, M. & Lyster, R. (2012). Peer interaction and corrective feedback for accuracy and fluency development: Monitoring, practice and proceduralization. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 34 , 591–626.Google Scholar

Schmidt, R. (1990). The role of consciousness in second language learning. Applied Linguistics, 11, 129–58.Google Scholar

Schmidtke, J. (2018). Pupillometry in linguistics research: An introduction and review for second language researchers. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 40, 529–549.Google Scholar

Scovel, T. (2000). A critical review of the critical period research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 20, 213–223.Google Scholar

Sheen, Y. (2004). Corrective feedback and learner uptake in communicative classrooms across instructional settings. Language Teaching Research, 8, 263–300.Google Scholar

Sheen, Y. (2010). Introduction: The role of oral and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 169–179.Google Scholar

Sippel, L. & Jackson, C. N. (2015). Teacher vs. peer oral corrective feedback in the German language classroom. Foreign Language Annals, 48(4), 688–705.Google Scholar

Skehan, P. (1996). A framework for the implementation of task-based instruction. Applied Linguistics, 17(1), 38–62.Google Scholar

Skehan, P. (1998). A Cognitive Approach to Language Learning. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Skehan, P. (2015). Language aptitude. In Gass, S. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Routledge Handbook of Second Language Acquisition (pp. 381–395). Routledge.Google Scholar

Smith, B. (2012). Eye tracking as a measure of noticing: A study of explicit recasts in SCMC. Language Learning and Technology, 16(3), 53–81.Google Scholar

Spada, N. & Tomita, Y. (2010). Interactions between type of instruction and type of language feature: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60, 263–308.Google Scholar

Stanley, T. D., Carter, E. C., & Doucouliagos, H. (2018). What meta-analyses reveal about the replicability of psychological research. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 1325–1346.Google Scholar

Süß, H. M., Oberauer, K., Wittmann, W. W., Wilhelm, O., & Schulze, R. (2002). Working-memory capacity explains reasoning ability – and a little bit more. Intelligence, 30(3), 261–288.Google Scholar

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In Gass, S. & Madden, C. (Eds.), Input in Second Language Acquisition. Newbury House.Google Scholar

Swain, M. (2005). The output hypothesis: Theory and research. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.), Handbook on Research in Second Language Teaching and Learning (pp. 471–484). Erlbaum.Google Scholar

Swain, M. & Lapkin, S. (2002). Talking it through: Two French immersion learners’ response to reformulation. International Journal of Educational Research, 37(3–4), 285–304.Google Scholar

Swain, M., Lapkin, S., Knouzi, I., Suzuki, W., & Brooks, L. (2009). Languaging: University students learn the grammatical concept of voice in French. The Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 5–29.Google Scholar

Sydorenko, T. (2015). The use of computer-delivered structured tasks in pragmatic instruction: An exploratory study. Intercultural Pragmatics, 12(3), 333–362.Google Scholar

Sykes, J. (2014). TBLT and synthetic immersive environments: What can in-game task restarts tell us about design and implementation? In González-Lloret, M. & Ortega, L. (Eds.), Technology-Mediated TBLT: Researching Technology and Tasks (pp. 149–182). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Szucs, D. & Ioannidis, J. (2017). When null hypothesis significance testing is unsuitable for research: A reassessment. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 11, 1–21.Google Scholar

Tagarelli, K. (2014). The neurocognition of adult second language learning: An fMRI study [Doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University]. At this permanent link: http://hdl.handle.net/10822/712460.Google Scholar

Tannen, D., Kendall, S., & Gordon, C. (Eds.) (2007). Family Talk: Discourse and Identity in Four American Families. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Tarone, E. (2010). Second language acquisition by low-literate learners: An under-studied population. Language Teaching, 43(1), 75–83.Google Scholar

Tarone, E. & Bigelow, M. (2005). Impact of literacy on oral language processing: Implications for second language acquisition research. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 25, 77–79.Google Scholar

Tashakkori, A. & Creswell, J. W. (2007). Editorial: The new era of mixed methods. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 3–7.Google Scholar

Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.) (2010). Handbook of Mixed Methods in Social and Behavioral Research (2nd ed.). Sage.Google Scholar

Tateishi, M. & Winters, S. (2013, June). “Does ultrasound training lead to improved perception of a non-native sound contrast? Evidence from Japanese learners of English,” in Proceedings of the 2013 Annual Conference of the Canadian Linguistic Association, 1–15.Google Scholar

Teimouri, Y. (2017). L2 selves, emotions, and motivated behaviors. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 39(4), 681–709.Google Scholar

Teimouri, Y. (2018). Differential roles of shame and guilt in L2 learning: How bad is bad? The Modern Language Journal, 102(4), 632–652.Google Scholar

Thompson, A. S. (2013). The interface of language aptitude and multilingualism: Reconsidering the bilingual/multilingual dichotomy. The Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 685–701.Google Scholar

Thorson Hernández, R. & Subtirelu, N. (2018, March). Everyday experiences of policy: Exploring the appropriation of educational language policy through teachers’ narratives, [Unpublished paper presentation]. Georgetown University Round Table, Washington, DC.Google Scholar

Tokowicz, N. & MacWhinney, B. (2005). Implicit and explicit measures of sensitivity to violations in second language grammar: An event-related potential investigation. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 27(2), 173–204.Google Scholar

Toivo, W. & Scheepers, C. (2019). Pupillary responses to affective words in bilinguals’ first versus second language. PLoS ONE, 14(4), e0210450. 10.1371/journal.pone.0210450Google Scholar

Torrance, E. (1970). Encouraging Creativity in the Classroom. William C. Brown.Google Scholar

Trofimovich, P., Ammar, A., & Gatbonton, E. (2007). How effective are recasts? The role of attention, memory, and analytical ability. In Mackey, A. (Ed.), Conversational Interaction in Second Language Acquisition: A Series of Empirical Studies (pp. 171–195). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar

Trofimovich, P., McDonough, K., & Neumann, H. (2013). Using collaborative tasks to elicit auditory and structural priming. TESOL Quarterly, 47(1), 177–186. 10.1002/tesq.78Google Scholar

Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16, 255–272.Google Scholar

Tsui, H. M. L. (2012). Ultrasound speech training for Japanese adults learning English as a second language, [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of British Columbia.Google Scholar

Van Avermaet, P. & Gysen, S. (2006). From needs to tasks: Language learning needs in a task-based approach. In Van den Branden, K., Bygate, M., & Norris, J. M. (Eds.), Task-Based Language Education: From Theory to Practice (pp. 46–61). John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Van den Branden, K. (Ed.) (2006). Task-Based Language Education: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar

Van den Branden, K., Bygate, M., & Norris, J. (Eds.). (2009). Task-Based Language Teaching: A Reader. John Benjamins.Google Scholar

Wang, W. & Loewen, S. (2016). Nonverbal behavior and corrective feedback in nine ESL university-level classrooms. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 459–478.Google Scholar

Wen, Z. (2016). Working Memory and Second Language Learning: Towards an Integrated Approach. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar

Wen, Z., Biedroń, A., & Skehan, P. (2017). Foreign language aptitude theory: Yesterday, today, and tomorrow, Language Teaching, 50(1), 1–31.Google Scholar

Williams, J. N. & Lovatt, P. (2003). Phonological memory and rule learning. Language Learning, 53(1), 67–121.Google Scholar

Williams, S. & Menard-Warwick, J. (2014). Qualitative research interviews in second language acquisition. In Chappelle, C. (Ed.), The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics (pp. 1–5). Blackwell.Google Scholar

Willis, J. (1996). A Framework for Task-Based Learning. Pearson Education.Google Scholar

Winke, P. (2013). An investigation into second language aptitude for advanced Chinese language learning. The Modern Language Journal, 97(1), 109–130.Google Scholar

Winke, P. (2018). Aptitude testing. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–7.Google Scholar

Winke, P., Godfroid, A., & Gass, S. M. (2013). Introduction to the special issue: Eye-movement recordings in second language research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(2), 205–212.Google Scholar

Winke, P. M. & Teng, C. (2010). Using task-based pragmatics tutorials while studying abroad in China. Intercultural Pragmatics, 7(2), 363–399.Google Scholar

Yilmaz, Y. (2013). Relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback: The role of working memory capacity and language analytic ability. Applied Linguistics, 34, 344–368.Google Scholar

Yilmaz, Y. & Granena, G. (2016). The role of cognitive aptitudes for explicit language learning in the relative effects of explicit and implicit feedback. Bilingualism, 19(1), 147–161.Google Scholar

Yilmaz, Y. & Sağdıç, A. (2019). The interaction between inhibitory control and corrective feedback timing. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 170(2), 204–227.Google Scholar

Youn, S. (2020). Interactional features of L2 pragmatic interaction in role‐play speaking assessment. TESOL Quarterly, 54(1), 201–233.Google Scholar

Zacharias, N. T. (2012). Qualitative Research Methods for Second Language Education: A Coursebook. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar

Zalbidea, J. (2017). “One task fits all”? The roles of task complexity, modality, and working memory capacity in L2 performance. The Modern Language Journal, 101(2), 335–352.Google Scholar

Ziegler, N. (2016). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 553–586. 10.1017/S027226311500025XGoogle Scholar

Ziegler, N., Seals, C., Ammons, S., Lake, J., Hamrick, P., & Rebuschat, P. (2013). Interaction in conversation groups: The development of L2 conversational styles. In McDonough, K. & Mackey, A. (Eds.), Second Language Interaction in Diverse Educational Contexts (pp. 269–292). John Benjamins.Google Scholar