Hostname: page-component-6dbcb7884d-4vmf6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-14T08:21:13.691Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A CALL FOR CAUTIOUS INTERPRETATION OF META-ANALYTIC REVIEWS

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 October 2020

Frank Boers ,
Lara Bryfonski Open the ORCID record for Lara Bryfonski [Opens in a new window] ,
Farahnaz Faez Open the ORCID record for Farahnaz Faez [Opens in a new window]  and
Todd McKay
Frank Boers
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
Lara Bryfonski
Affiliation:
Georgetown University
Farahnaz Faez*
Affiliation:
University of Western Ontario
Todd McKay
Affiliation:
St. George’s University
*
*Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Farahnaz Faez, University of Western Ontario, London, ON N6G 1G7, Canada. E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Meta-analytic reviews collect available empirical studies on a specified domain and calculate the average effect of a factor. Educators as well as researchers exploring a new domain of inquiry may rely on the conclusions from meta-analytic reviews rather than reading multiple primary studies. This article calls for caution in this regard because the outcome of a meta-analysis is determined by how effect sizes are calculated, how factors are defined, and how studies are selected for inclusion. Three recently published meta-analyses are reexamined to illustrate these issues. The first illustrates the risk of conflating effect sizes from studies with different design features; the second illustrates problems with delineating the variable of interest, with implications for cause-effect relations; and the third illustrates the challenge of determining the eligibility of candidate studies. Replication attempts yield outcomes that differ from the three original meta-analyses, suggesting also that conclusions drawn from meta-analyses need to be interpreted cautiously.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 43 , Issue 1 , March 2021 , pp. 2 - 24
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open data
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

The experiment in this article earned an Open Data badge for transparent practices. The materials are available at https://www.iris-database.org/iris/app/home/detail?id=york%3a938351&ref=search.

References

REFERENCES

Al-Mahbashi, A., Noor, N. M., & Amir, Z. (2015). The effect of data driven learning on receptive vocabulary knowledge of Yemeni University learners. 3L: Language, Linguistics and Literature—The Southeast Asian Journal of English Language Studies, 21, 13–24.Google Scholar
Alcón-Soler, E. (2012). Teachability and bilingualism effects on third language learners’ pragmatic knowledge. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9, 511–541. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip‐2012‐0028CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcón-Soler, E. (2015). Instruction and pragmatic change during study abroad email communication. Innovation in Language Learning and Teaching, 9, 34–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alcón-Soler, E., & Guzman-Pitarch, J. (2010). The effect of instruction on learners’ pragmatic awareness: A focus on refusals. International Journal of English Studies, 10, 65–80. https://doi.org/10.6018/ijes/2010/1/113981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amin, A. A. (2009). Task-based and grammar-based English language teaching: An experimental study in Saudi Arabia [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Newcastle upon Tyne, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK.Google Scholar
Anani Sarab, M. R., & Kardoust, A. (2014). Concordance-based data-driven learning activities and learning English phrasal verbs in EFL classrooms. Issues in Language Teaching, 3, 112–189.Google Scholar
Andringa, S., & Godfroid, A. ( 2020). Sampling bias and the problem of generalizability in applied linguistics. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 40, 134–142. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190520000033.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bardovi-Harlig, K., Mossman, S., & Vellenga, H. E. (2015). The effect of instruction on pragmatic routines in academic discussion. Language Teaching Research, 19, 324–350. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168814541739CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Birjandi, P., & Malmir, A. (2009). The effect of task-based approach on the Iranian advanced EFL learners’ narrative vs. expository writing. Iranian Journal of Applied Language Studies, 1, 1, 1–26.Google Scholar
Boers, F., Warren, P., Grimshaw, G., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2017). On the benefits of multimodal annotations for vocabulary uptake from reading. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 30, 709–725. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2017.1356335CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boulton, A., & Cobb, T. (2017). Corpus use in language learning: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 67, 348–393. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryfonski, L., & McKay, T. H. (2019). TBLT implementation and evaluation: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23, 603–632. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168817744389CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen, Y. S. (2011). The effect of explicit teaching of American compliment exchanges to Chinese learners of English. English Teaching & Learning, 35, 1–42.Google Scholar
Cho, D. W. (2009). Science journal paper writing in an EFL context: The case of Korea. English for Specific Purposes, 28, 230–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2009.06.002CrossRefGoogle 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 [PhD dissertation]. University of San Francisco.Google Scholar
Cobb, T. (1997). Is there any measurable learning from hands-on concordancing? System, 25, 301–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cunningham, J. (2016). Request modification in synchronous computer-mediated communication: The role of focused instruction. The Modern Language Journal, 100, 484–507. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daskalovska, N. (2014). Corpus-based versus traditional learning of collocations. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28, 130–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dastjerdi, H. V., & Farshid, M. (2011). The role of input enhancement in teaching compliments. Journal of Language Teaching & Research, 2, 460–466. https://doi.org/10.4304/jltr.2.2.460‐466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Derakhshan, A., & Eslami, Z. (2015). The effect of consciousness-raising instruction on the pragmatic development of apology and request. The Electronic Journal for English as a Second Language, 18, 1–24.Google Scholar
De Ridder, I., Vangehuchten, L., & Gómez, M. S. (2007). Enhancing automaticity through task-based language learning. Applied Linguistics, 28, 309–315.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R. (2018). Reflections on task-based language teaching. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788920148Google Scholar
Ellis, R., & Shintani, N. (2013). Exploring language pedagogy through second language acquisition research. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203796580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellis, R., Skehan, P., Li, S., Shintani, N., & Lambert, C. (2019). Task-based language teaching: Theory and practice. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108643689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eslami, Z. R., & Eslami-Rasekh, A. (2008). Enhancing the pragmatic competence of non-native English-speaking teacher candidates (NNESTCs) in an EFL context. In Alcón-Soler, E. & Martinez-Flor, A. (Eds.), Investigating pragmatics in foreign language learning, teaching and testing (pp. 178–197). Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847690869‐011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Eslami, Z. R., & Liu, C. N. (2013). Learning pragmatics through computer-mediated communication in Taiwan. Iranian Journal of Society, Culture, and Language, 1, 52–73.Google Scholar
Faez, F., Karas, M., & Uchihara, T. (2019). Connecting language proficiency to teaching ability: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168819868667CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Felix-Brasdefer, J. C. (2008). Pedagogical intervention and the development of pragmatic competence in learning Spanish as a foreign language. Issues in Applied Linguistics, 16, 49–84.Google Scholar
Fordyce, K. (2014). The differential effects of explicit and implicit instruction on EFL learners’ use of epistemic stance. Applied Linguistics, 35, 6–28. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/ams076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (2012). Learners’ use of corpus examples. International Journal of Lexicography, 25, 273–296.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frankenberg-Garcia, A. (2014). The use of corpus examples for language comprehension and production. ReCALL, 26, 128–146.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fukuya, Y., & Martinez-Flor, A. (2008). The interactive effects of pragmatic-eliciting tasks and pragmatics instruction. Foreign Language Annuals, 41, 478–500. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1944‐9720.2008.tb03308.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Furniss, E. (2016). Teaching the pragmatics of Russian conversation using a corpus referred website. Language Learning and Technology, 20, 38–60.Google Scholar
Ghobadi, A., & Fahim, M. (2009). The effect of explicit teaching of English “thanking formulas” on Iranian EFL intermediate level students at English language institutes. System, 37, 526–537. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2009.02.010CrossRefGoogle Scholar
González-Lloret, M., & Nielson, K. B. (2015). Evaluating TBLT: The case of a task-based Spanish program. Language Teaching Research, 19, 525–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gordani, Y. (2013). The effect of the integration of corpora in reading comprehension classrooms on English as a Foreign Language learners’ vocabulary development. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 26, 430–445.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gu, X. L. (2011). The effect of explicit and implicit instructions of request strategies. Intercultural Communication Studies, 20, 104–123.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.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–83. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152XCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, T. A. (2011). Re-examining the role of explicit instruction and input flood on the acquisition of Spanish discourse markers. Language Teaching Research, 15, 159–182. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168810388694CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hillman, S., Selvi, A. F., & Yazan, B. (2020). A scoping review of world Englishes in the Middle East and North Africa. World Englishes. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1111/weng.12505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horst, M., Cobb, T., & Nicolae, I. (2005). Expanding academic vocabulary with a collaborative on-line database. Language Learning and Technology, 9, 90–110.Google Scholar
Jeon, E. H., & Kaya, T. (2006). Effects of L2 instruction on interlanguage pragmatic development. In Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (Eds.) Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 165–211). John Benjamins Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.13.10jeoCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jernigan, J. (2012). Output and English as a second language pragmatic development: The effectiveness of output-focused video-based instruction. English Language Teaching, 5, 2–14. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v5n4p2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johns, T. (1991). Should you be persuaded: Two examples of data-driven learning. English Language Research Journal, 4, 1–16.Google Scholar
Kang, E. Y., Sok, S., & Han, Z. (2019). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 23, 428–453. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818776671CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Karras, J. N. (2016). The effects of data-driven learning upon vocabulary acquisition for secondary international school students in Vietnam. ReCALL, 28, 166–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaur, J., & Hegelheimer, V. (2005). ESL students’ use of concordance in the transfer of academic word knowledge: An exploratory study. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 18, 287–310.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, E. (2015). Enhancing a corpus-based approach to teach English phrasal verbs to Korean learners. The Journal of Studies in Language, 31, 295–312.Google Scholar
Lai, C., & Lin, X. (2015). Strategy training in a task-based language classroom. The Language Learning Journal, 43, 20–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lai, C., Zhao, Y., & Wang, J. (2011). Task-based language teaching in online ab initio foreign language classrooms. Modern Language Journal, 95(S1), 81–103.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, H., Warschauer, M., & Lee, J. H. (2019). The effects of corpus use on second language vocabulary learning: A multilevel meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 40, 721–753. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy012CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lee, J., Jang, J., & Plonsky, L. (2015). The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36, 345–366. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu040CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, G., & Ni, X. (2013). Effects of a technology-enriched, task-based language teaching curriculum on Chinese elementary students’ achievement in English as a foreign language. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 3, 33–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Q. (2012a). Effects of instruction on adolescent beginners’ acquisition of request modification. TESOL Quarterly, 46, 30–55. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2012b). The effect of input-based practice on pragmatic development in L2 Chinese. Language Learning, 62, 403–438. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467‐9922.2011.00629.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, S. (2013). Amount of practice and pragmatic development of request-making in L2 Chinese. In Taguchi, N. & Sykes, J. M. (Eds.), Technology in interlanguage pragmatics research and teaching (pp. 43–70). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.36.04liCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lochana, M., & Deb, G. (2006). Task-based teaching: Learning English without tears. The Asian EFL Journal Quarterly, 8, 140–164.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2015). Second language acquisition and task-based language teaching. Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Long, M. (2016). In defense of tasks and TBLT: Nonissues and real issues. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 5–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190515000057CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maassen, E., van Assen, M. A. L. M., Nuijten, M. B., Olsson-Collentine, A., & Wicherts, J. M. (2020). Reproducibility of individual effect sizes in meta-analyses in psychology. PLoS One, 15, e0233107. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, E., Morgan‐Short, K., Trofimovich, P., & Ellis, N. C. (2018). Introducing registered reports at language learning: Promoting transparency, replication, and a synthetic ethic in the language sciences. Language Learning, 68, 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Martínez-Flor, A., & Alcón-Soler, E. (2007). Developing pragmatic awareness of suggestions in the EFL classroom: A focus on instructional effects. Canadian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10, 47–76.Google Scholar
McKay, T. H., & Plonsky, L. (in press). Reliability analyses: Evaluating error. In Winke, P. & Brunfaut, T. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of second language acquisition and language testing. Routledge.Google Scholar
Mesbah, M. (2016). Task-based Language Teaching and its effect on medical students’ reading comprehension. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 6, 431–438.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mesbah, M., & Faghani, M. (2015). Task-based and grammar translation teaching methods in teaching reading comprehension to nursing students: An action research. Aula Orientals, 1, 319–325.Google Scholar
Mirzaei, A., Domakani, M. R., & Rahimi, S. (2016). Computerized lexis-based instruction in EFL classrooms: Using multi-purpose LexisBOARD to teach L2 vocabulary. ReCALL, 28, 22–43.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan-Short, K., Marsden, E., Heil, J., Ii, B. I. I., Leow, R. P., Mikhaylova, A., Mikolajczak, S., Moreno, N., Slabakova, R., & Szudarski, P. (2018). Multisite replication in second language acquisition research: Attention to form during listening and reading comprehension. Language Learning, 68, 392–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12292CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murad, T. M. (2009). The effect of task-based language teaching on developing speaking skills among the Palestinian secondary EFL students in Israel and their attitudes towards English [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Yarmouk University, Irbid, Jordan.Google Scholar
Narita, R. (2012). The effects of pragmatic consciousness-raising activity on the development of pragmatic awareness and use of hearsay evidential markers for learners of Japanese as a foreign language. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1–29. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2011.09.016CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M. (2013). Instructional effects on the acquisition of modifiers in constructive criticisms by EFL learners. Language Awareness, 22, 76–94. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2012.658810CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M., Do, T. T. H., Nguyen, A. T., & Pham, M. H. (2015). Teaching email requests in the academic context: A focus on the role of corrective feedback. Language Awareness, 24, 169–195. https://doi.org/10.1080/09658416.2015.1010543CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nguyen, T. T. M., Phamb, T. H., & Phamb, M. T. (2012). The relative effects of explicit and implicit form-focused instruction on the development of L2 pragmatic competence. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 416–434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.01.003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2006). The value and practice of research synthesis for language learning and teaching. In Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (Eds.) Synthesizing Research on Language Learning and Teaching (pp. 1–50). John Benjamins.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oswald, F. L., & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis in second language research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 85–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Park, M. (2012). Implementing computer-assisted task-based language teaching in the Korean secondary EFL context. In Shehadeh, A. & Coombe, C. A. (Eds.), Task-based language teaching in foreign language contexts: Research and implementation. John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Phuong, H. Y., Van den Branden, K., Van Steendam, E., & Sercu, L. (2015). The impact of PPP and TBLT on Vietnamese students’ writing performance and self-regulatory writing strategies. ITL–International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 116, 37–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2011). The effectiveness of second language strategy instruction: a meta-analysis. Language Learning, 61, 993–1038. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00663.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2012). Replication, meta-analysis, and generalizability. In Porte, G. (Ed.), Replication research in applied linguistics (pp. 116–132). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2019). Recent research on language learning strategy instruction. In Chamot, A. & Harris, V. (Eds.), Learning strategy instruction in the language classroom: Issues and implementation. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 73–97. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190516000015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64, 878–912. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12079CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Zhuang, J. (2019). A meta-analysis of second language pragmatics instruction. In Taguchi, N. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of SLA and pragmatics (pp. 287–307). Routledge.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Ziegler, N. (2016). The CALL-SLA interface: Insights from a second-order synthesis. Language Learning and Technology, 20, 17–37.Google Scholar
Poole, R. (2012). Concordance-based glosses for academic vocabulary acquisition. CALICO Journal, 29, 679–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rafieyan, V., Sharafi-Nejad, M., Khavari, Z., Siew Eng, L., & Mohamed, A. R. (2014). Pragmatic comprehension development through telecollaboration. English Language Teaching, 7, 11–19. https://doi.org/10.5539/elt.v7n2p11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rahimi, M., & Momeni, G. (2012). The effect of teaching collocations on English language proficiency. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 31, 37–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ramezanali, N., Uchihara, T., & Faez, F. (2020). Efficacy of multimodal glossing on second language vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis. TESOL Quarterly. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.579CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rezaee, A. A., Marefat, H., & Saeedakhtar, A. (2015). Symmetrical and asymmetrical scaffolding of L2 collocations in the context of concordancing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28, 532–549.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rezaeyan, M. (2014). On the impact of task-based teaching on academic achievement of Iranian EFL learners: Case study: Female high school students in Yasuj. International Journal of Language Learning and Applied Linguistics World, 7, 476–493.Google Scholar
Sarani, A., & Sahebi, L. F. (2012). The impact of task-based approach on vocabulary learning in ESP courses. English Language Teaching, 5, 118–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sato, M., & Ballinger, S. (Eds.) (2016). Peer interaction and second language learning: Pedagogical potential and research agenda. John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saito, K., & Plonsky, L. (2019). Measuring the effects of second language pronunciation teaching: A proposed framework and meta-analysis. Language Learning, 69, 652–708. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12345CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shabani, M. B., & Ghasemi, A. (2014). The effect of task-based language teaching (TBLT) and content-based language teaching (CBLT) on the Iranian intermediate ESP learners’ reading comprehension. Procedia: Social and Behavioral Sciences, 98, 1713–1721.Google Scholar
Shintani, N. (2015). The effectiveness of processing instruction and production-based instruction on L2 grammar acquisition: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36, 306–325. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amu067CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simin, S., Eslami, Z., Eslami-Rasekh, A., & Ketabi, S. (2014). The effects of explicit teaching of apologies on Persian EFL learners’ performance: When e-communication helps. International Journal of Research Studies in Language Learning, 3, 71–84.Google Scholar
Sripicharn, P. (2003). Evaluating classroom concordancing: The use of corpus-based materials by a group of Thai students. Thammasat Review, 8, 203–236.Google Scholar
Stevens, V. (1991). Concordance-based vocabulary exercises: A viable alternative to gap-fillers. Classroom Concordancing: English Language Research Journal, 4, 47–61.Google Scholar
Supatranont, P. (2005). A comparison of the effects of the concordance-based and the conventional teaching methods on engineering students’ English vocabulary learning [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok, Thailand.Google Scholar
Sun, Y.-C., & Wang, L.-Y. (2003). Concordancers in the EFL classroom: Cognitive approaches and collocation difficulty. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 16, 83–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tajeddin, Z., Keshavarz, M. H., & Zand Moghaddam, A. (2012). The effect of task-based language teaching on EFL learners’ pragmatic production, metapragmatic awareness, and pragmatic self-assessment. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL), 15, 139–166.Google Scholar
Takimoto, M. (2012a). Assessing the effects of identical task repetition and task type repetition on learners’ recognition and production of second language request downgraders. Intercultural Pragmatics, 9, 71–96. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip‐2012‐0004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Takimoto, M. (2012b). Metapragmatic discussion in interlanguage pragmatics. Journal of Pragmatics, 44, 1240–1253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2012.05.007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, K. H., & Farashaiyan, A. (2012). The effectiveness of teaching formulaic politeness strategies in making request to undergraduates in an ESL classroom. Asian Social Science, 8, 189–196. https://doi.org/10.5539/ass.v8n15p189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tan, Z. (2016). An empirical study on the effects of grammar–translation method and task-based language teaching on Chinese college students’ reading comprehension. International Journal of Liberal Arts and Social Science, 4, 100–109.Google Scholar
Tanaka, H., & Oki, N. (2015). An attempt to raise Japanese EFL learners’ pragmatic awareness using online discourse completion tasks. The JALT Call Journal, 11, 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tang, X. (2019). The effects of task modality on L2 Chinese learners’ pragmatic development: Computer-mediated written chat vs. face-to-face oral chat. System, 80, 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.10.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tateyama, Y. (2007). The effects of instruction on pragmatic awareness. In Bradford-Watts, K. (Ed.), JALT 2006 conference proceedings (pp. 1189–1200). JALT. http://jalt-publications.org/archive/proceedings/2006/E128.pdfGoogle Scholar
Tateyama, Y. (2009). Requesting in Japanese: The effect of instruction on JFL learners’ pragmatic competence. In Taguchi, N. (Ed.), Pragmatic competence (pp. 129–166). Mouton De Gruyter.Google Scholar
Ting, L. (2012). The implementation of task-based language teaching approach in EFL oral English teaching in art academy. Overseas English, 8, 90–92.Google Scholar
Tongpoon, A. (2009). The enhancement of EFL learners’ receptive and productive vocabulary knowledge through concordance-based methods [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Northern Arizona University, Flagstaff, AZ.Google Scholar
Torky, S. (2006). The effectiveness of a task-based instruction program in developing the English language speaking skills of secondary stage [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Ain Shams University, Cairo, Egypt.Google Scholar
Tullock, B., & Ortega, L. (2017). Fluency and multilingualism in study abroad: Lessons from a scoping review. System, 71, 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.09.019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Uchihara, T. S., Webb, S., & Yanagisawa, A. (2019). The effects of repetition on incidental vocabulary learning: A meta-analysis of correlational studies, Language Learning, 69, 559–599. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12343CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vyatkina, N. (2016). Data-driven learning for beginners: The case of German verb-preposition collocations. ReCALL, 28, 207–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Willis, D., & Willis, J. (2007). Doing task-based teaching. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Willis, J. (1996). A framework for task-based learning. Longman.Google Scholar
Yanagisawa, A., Webb, S., & Uchihara, T. (2020). How do different forms of glossing contribute to L2 vocabulary learning from reading? A meta-regression analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42, 411–438. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000688CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yang, J. (2008). The task-based approach and the grammar translation method with computer-assisted instruction on Taiwanese EFL college students’ speaking performance [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. Alliant International University, San Diego, CA.Google Scholar
Yang, J. (2015). Effects of collaborative corpus-based learning on the acquisition and retention of delexical verb collocation. The Journal of Studies in Language, 31, 67–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yılmaz, E., & Soruç, A. (2015). The use of concordance for teaching vocabulary: A data-driven learning approach. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 2626–2630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yousefi, M., & Nassaji, H. (2019). A meta-analysis of the effects of instruction and corrective feedback on L2 pragmatics and the role of moderator variables: Face-to-face vs. computer-mediated instruction. ITL–International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 170, 277–308. https://doi.org/10.1075/itl.19012.youCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yunus, K., & Awab, S. A. (2012). The effects of the use of module-based concordance materials and data-driven learning (DDL) approach in enhancing the knowledge of collocations of prepositions among Malaysian undergraduate law students. International Journal of Learning, 18, 165–181.Google Scholar
Yunxia, S., Min, Y., & Zhuo, S. (2009). An empirical study on a computer-based corpus approach to English vocabulary teaching and learning. In Li, W. and Zhou, J. (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Computer Science and Information Technology (pp. 218–221). IEEE Xplore.Google Scholar
Zhu, Y. (2017). Who support open access publishing? Gender, discipline, seniority and other factors associated with academics’ OA practice. Scientometrics, 111, 557–579. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-017-2316-zCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Supplementary material: File

Boers et al. supplementary material

Appendices A-E

Download Boers et al. supplementary material(File)
File 2.3 MB