Hostname: page-component-cb9f654ff-qc88w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-08-10T04:17:28.797Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Mixed-methods research in applied linguistics: Charting the progress through the second decade of the twenty-first century

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  08 September 2023

A. Mehdi Riazi Open the ORCID record for A. Mehdi Riazi [Opens in a new window]  and
Mohammad Amini Farsani Open the ORCID record for Mohammad Amini Farsani [Opens in a new window]
A. Mehdi Riazi*
Affiliation:
Hamad Bin Khalifa University, Doha, Qatar
Mohammad Amini Farsani
Affiliation:
Iran University of Science and Technology, Tehran, Iran
*
Corresponding author: A. Mehdi Riazi; Email: ariazi@hbku.edu.qa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This review of recent scholarship (RRS) paper is a follow-up of the first, published in this journal in 2014. For this RRS paper, we identified and included 304 mixed-methods research (MMR) papers published in 20 top-tier applied linguistics (AL) journals. We used a six-pronged quality and transparency framework to review and analyze the MMR studies, drawing on six quality frameworks and transparency discussions in the MMR literature. Using the quality and transparency framework, we report on: (1) which sources AL MMR researchers use to frame their studies, (2) how explicitly they explain the purpose and design structure of the MMR studies, (3) how transparently they describe method features (sampling procedures, data sources, and data analysis), and (4) how they integrate quantitative and qualitative data and analyses and construct meta-inferences. The results of the analyses will be reported and will show how MMR has developed and is represented in the published articles in the second decade of the twenty-first century. The discussion of the results will also highlight the areas future AL MMR researchers need to consider to make their studies and reports more rigorous and transparent.

Information

Type
Review of Recent Scholarship
Information
Language Teaching , Volume 57 , Issue 2 , April 2024 , pp. 143 - 182
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. 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.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Alise, M., & Teddlie, C. (2010). A continuation of the paradigm wars? Prevalence rates of methodological approaches across the social/behavioral sciences. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(2), 103–126. doi:10.1177/1558689809360805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alwaleedi, M. A., Gillies, R. M., & Obaidul Hamid, M. (2019). Collaborative writing in Arabic as a second language (ASL) classrooms: A mixed-method study. Language, Culture and Curriculum, 32(2), 157–172. doi:10.1080/07908318.2018.1521422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Education Research Association. (2006). Standards for reporting on empirical social science research in AERA publications. Educational Researcher, 35(6), 33–40. doi:10.3102/0013189X035006033CrossRefGoogle Scholar
American Psychological Association. (2019). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, 2019. American Psychological Association.Google Scholar
Amini Farsani, M., Babaii, E., Beikmohammadi, M., & Babaii Farsani, M. (2022). Mixed-methods research proficiency for applied linguists: A PLS-path modelling approach. Quality & Quantity, 56(5), 3337–3362. doi:10.1007/s11135-021-01268-7CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amini Farsani, M., Jamali, H. R., Beikmohammadi, M., Daneshvar Ghorbani, B., & Soleimani, L. (2021). Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate? System, 100, 102547. doi:10.1016/j.system.2021.102547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Amini Farsani, M., & Jamali, H. R. (in press). Collaboration network of applied linguistics research articles with different methodological orientations. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching.Google Scholar
Amini Farsani, M., & Mohammadi, V. (2022). Mixed-methods research in an EFL Context: A quality assessment perspective. Journal of Modern Research in English Language Studies, 9(2), 99–122. doi:10.21203/rs.3.rs-44890/v1Google Scholar
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oaCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2014). Mixed methods research for TESOL. Edinburgh University Press.10.1515/9780748698059CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, J. D. (2015). Why bother with learner advanced quantitative methods in L2 research? In Plonsky, L. (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research (pp. 9–20). Routledge.10.4324/9781315870908-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryman, A. (2006). Integrating quantitative and qualitative research: How is it done? Qualitative Research, 6(1), 97–113. doi:10.1177/1468794106058877CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Byrnes, H. (2013). Notes from the editor. Modern Language Journal, 97(4), 825–827. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12051.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cai, S., & Zhu, W. (2012). The impact of an online learning community project on university Chinese as a foreign language students’ motivation. Foreign Language Annals, 45(3), 307–329. doi:10.1111/j.1944-9720.2012.01204.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Caracelli, V. J., & Greene, J. C. (1993). Data analysis strategies for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 15(2), 195–207. doi:10.3102/01623737015002195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cerezo, L. (2016). Type and amount of input-based practice in CALI: The revelations of a triangulated research design. Language Learning & Technology, 20(1), 100–123.Google Scholar
Chapelle, C. A. (Ed.) (forthcoming). Encyclopedia of applied linguistics. (2nd ed.). Wiley Blackwell.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.Google Scholar
Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2002). Research methods in education. Routledge.10.4324/9780203224342CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, K. M. (2010). Advanced sampling designs in mixed research. In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.), The handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 353–377). Sage.10.4135/9781506335193.n15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, K. M., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Sutton, I. L. (2006). A model incorporating the rationale and purpose for conducting mixed-methods research in special education and beyond. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 4(1), 67–100.Google Scholar
Collins, K. M. T., & Onwuegbuzie, A. J. (2013). Establishing interpretive consistency when mixing approaches: Role of sampling designs in evaluations. New Directions for Evaluation, 2013(138), 85–95. doi:10.1002/ev.20060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Collins, K. M. T., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Jiao, Q. G. (2007). A mixed methods investigation of mixed methods sampling designs in social and health science research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(3), 267–294. doi:10.1177/1558689807299526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooper, H. (2016). Research synthesis and meta-analysis: A step-by-step approach. Sage.Google Scholar
Copland, F., Garton, S., & Burns, A. (2014). Challenges in teaching English to young learners: Global perspectives and local realities. TESOL Quarterly, 48(4), 738–762. doi:10.1002/tesq.148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creamer, E. G. (2018). An introduction to fully integrated mixed methods research. Sage.10.4135/9781071802823CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J., & Plano Clark, V. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W. (1994). Research design: Qualitative and quantitative approaches. Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W. (2009). Mapping the field of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 3(2), 95–108. doi:10.1177/1558689808330883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J. W. (2015). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2017). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W., Klassen, A. C., Plano Clark, V. L., & Smith, K. C. (2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. Retrieved from https://www2.jabsom.hawaii.edu/native/docs/tsudocs/Best_Practices_for_Mixed_Methods_Research_Aug2011.pdfGoogle Scholar
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. (2011). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2018). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Sage.Google Scholar
Creswell, J. W., & Tashakkori, A. (2007). Editorial: Developing publishable mixed methods manuscripts. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 107–111. doi:10.1177/1558689806298644CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crosby, P. B. (1986). Running things—The art of making things happen. American Society for Quality Control.Google Scholar
Denzin, N. K. (2008). The new paradigm dialogs and qualitative inquiry. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 21(4), 315–325. doi:10.1177/1077800410364608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Fàbregues, S., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2017). Addressing quality in mixed methods research: A review and recommendations for a future agenda. Quality and Quantity, 51(6), 2847–2863. doi:10.1007/s11135-016-0449-4CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fàbregues, S., Molina-Azorin, J. F., & Fetters, M. D. (2021). Virtual special issue on “quality in mixed methods research”. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 15(2), 146–151. doi:10.1177/15586898211001974CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fàbregues, S., Paré, M. H., & Meneses, J. (2019). Operationalizing and conceptualizing quality in mixed methods research: A multiple case study of the disciplines of education, nursing, psychology, and sociology. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(4), 424–445. doi:10.1177/1558689817751774CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fetters, M. D. (2020). The mixed methods research workbook: Activities for designing, implementing, and publishing projects. Sage.10.4135/9781071909713CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fetters, M. D., Curry, L. A., & Creswell, J. W. (2013). Achieving integration in mixed methods designs-principles and practices. Health Services Research, 48(6), 2134–2156. doi:10.1111/1475-6773.12117CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fetters, M. D., & Freshwater, D. (2015). The 1+1=3 integration challenge. [Editorial]. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(2), 115–117. doi:10.1177/1558689815581222CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fetters, M. D., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2019a). 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. doi:10.1177/1558689819875832CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fetters, M. D., & Molina-Azorin, J. F. (2019b). New requirements to include the methodological contribution in articles published in the Journal of Mixed Methods Research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(2), 138–142. doi:10.1177/1558689819834753CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraschini, N., & Caruso, M. (2019). “I can see myself….” A Q methodology study on self-vision of Korean language learners. System, 87, 102147. doi:10.1016/j.system.2019.102147CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gánem-Gutiérrez, G. A., & Gilmore, A. (2018). Tracking the real-time evolution of a writing event: Second language writers at different proficiency levels. Language Learning, 68(2), 469–506. doi:10.1111/lang.12280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gass, S. (2009). A survey of SLA research. In Ritchie, W. & Bhatia, T. (Eds.), Handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 3–28). Emerald.Google Scholar
Gilmore, A., & Ganem-Gutierrez, G. A. (2020). Investigating complexity in L2 writing with mixed methods approaches. In Fogal, G. G. & Verspoor, M. (Eds.), Complex dynamic systems theory and L2 writing development (pp. 183–206). John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.54.08gilCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255–274. doi:10.3102/01623737011003255CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guetterman, T. C. (2015). The development, design, and test of a self-assessment instrument of mixed methods research proficiency [Unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation]. University of Nebraska.Google Scholar
Guetterman, T. C. (2017). What distinguishes a novice from an expert mixed methods researcher? Quality and Quantity, 51(1), 377–398. doi:10.1007/s11135-016-0310-9CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Guetterman, T. C., Fàbregues, S., & Sakakibara, R. (2021). Visuals in joint displays to represent integration in mixed methods research: A methodological review. Methods in Psychology, 5, 100080. doi:10.1016/j.metip.2021.100080CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Han, J., & Hiver, P. (2018). Genre-based L2 writing instruction and writing-specific psychological factors: The dynamics of change. Journal of Second Language Writing, 40, 44–59. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.03.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harrison, R. L., Reilly, T. M., & Creswell, J. W. (2020). Methodological rigor in mixed methods: An application in management studies. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 14(4), 473–495. doi:10.1177/1558689819900585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harvey, L., & Green, D. (1993). Defining quality. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 18(1), 9–34. doi:10.1080/0260293930180102CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hashemi, M. R. (2020). Expanding the scope of mixed methods research in applied linguistics. In McKinley, J. & Rose, H. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 39–51). Routledge.Google Scholar
Hashemi, M. R., & Babaii, E. (2013). Mixed methods research: toward new research designs in applied linguistics. Modern Language Journal, 97(4), 828–852. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12049.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hashemi, M. R., & Gohari Moghaddam, I. (2019). A mixed methods genre analysis of the discussion section of MMR articles in applied linguistics. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(2), 242–260. doi:10.1177/1558689816674626CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heyvaert, M., Maes, B., & Onghena, P. (2013). Mixed methods research synthesis: Definition framework, and potential. Quality and Quantity, 47(2), 659–676. doi:10.1007/s11135-011-9538-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirose, M. (2018). Evaluating a behavioral community support program for families with youth with developmental disorders: A mixed methods approach [Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation]. Kwansei Guikin University.Google Scholar
Hirose, M., & Creswell, J. W. (2023). Applying core quality criteria of mixed methods research to an empirical study. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 17(1), 12–28. doi:10.1177/15586898221086346CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE). (2008). Standards for teachers. Retrieved from www.iste.org/standards/ISTE-standards/standards-for-teachers.Google Scholar
Ivankova, N. V., & Greer, J. L. (2015). Mixed methods research and analysis. In Paltridge, B. & Phakiti, A. (Eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical guide (pp. 73–91). Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Jacobsen, N. (2015). A cognitive linguistic analysis of English conditionals in English for Academic Purposes (EAP) instruction: Implications from Sociocultural Theory. In Masuda, K., Arnett, C., & Labarca, A. (Eds.) , Cognitive linguistics and sociocultural theory: Applications for second and foreign language teaching (pp. 103–126). De Gruyter Mouton.10.1515/9781614514442-007CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jang, E. E., Wagner, M., & Park, G. (2014). Mixed methods research in language testing and assessment. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 34, 123–153. doi:10.1017/S0267190514000063CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, B. (2006). Editorial: Note from the guest editor. Research in the Schools, 13(1), v–vi.Google Scholar
Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods research. In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 297–319). Sage.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. (2019). Educational research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed methods research. (7th ed.). Sage.Google Scholar
Johnson, R. B., Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Turner, L. A. (2007). Toward a definition of mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(2), 112–133. doi:10.1177/1558689806298224CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnson, R. E., Grove, A. L., & Clarke, A. (2019). Pillar integration process: A joint display technique to integrate data in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 13(3), 301–320. doi:10.1177/1558689817743108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juran, J. M. (1988). Juran on planning for quality. Collier Macmillan.Google Scholar
Khany, R., & Tazik, K. (2019). Levels of statistical use in applied linguistics research articles: From 1986 to 2015. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 26(1), 48–65. doi:10.1080/09296174.2017.1421498CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kim, A. A., Lee, S., Chapman, M., & Wilmes, C. (2019). The effects of administration and response modes on grade 1–2 students’ writing performance. TESOL Quarterly, 53(2), 482–513. doi:10.1002/tesq.495CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kwan, N., & Dunworth, K. (2016). English as a lingua franca communication between domestic helpers and employers in Hong Kong: A study of pragmatic strategies. English for Specific Purposes, 43, 13–24. doi:10.1016/j.esp.2016.02.001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazaraton, A. (2000). Current trends in research methodology and statistics in applied linguistics. TESOL Quarterly, 34(1), 175–181. doi:10.2307/3588103CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lazaraton, A. (2005). Quantitative research methods. In Hinkel, E. (Ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 109–224). Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019). Research trends in applied linguistics from 2005 to 2016: A bibliometric analysis and its implications. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 540–561. doi:10.1093/applin/amy003CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2016). An A-Z of applied linguistics research methods. Palgrave.10.1007/978-1-137-40322-3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Long, M. H. (2005). Second language needs analysis. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/CBO9780511667299CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Macaro, E., & Lee, J. H. (2013). Teacher language background, codeswitching, and English-only instruction: Does age make a difference to learners’ attitudes?. TESOL Quarterly, 47(4), 717–742. doi:10.1002/tesq.74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacIntyre, P. D., & Legatto, J. J. (2011). A dynamic system approach to willingness to communicate: Developing an idiodynamic method to capture rapidly changing affect. Applied Linguistics, 32(2), 149–171. doi:10.1093/applin/amq037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mackey, A., & Bryfonski, L. (2018). Mixed methodology. In Phakiti, A., De Costa, P., Plonsky, L., & Starfield, S. (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology (pp. 103–121). Palgrave.10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Marsden, E., Mackey, A., & Plonsky, L. (2016). Breadth and depth: The IRIS repository. 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
Mathison, S. (1988). Why triangulate? Educational Researcher, 17(2), 13–17. doi:10.3102/0013189X017002013CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McKinley, J. (2020). Theorizing research methods in the golden age of applied linguistics research. In McKinley, J. & Rose, H. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 1–12). Routledge.Google Scholar
Mertens, D. M. (2011). Publishing mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 5(1), 3–6. doi:10.1177/1558689810390217CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods sourcebook. Sage.Google Scholar
Mirhosseini, S. A. (2018). Mixed methods research in TESOL: Procedures combined or epistemology confused? TESOL Quarterly, 52(2), 468–478. doi:10.1002/tesq.427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moeller, A. J., & Theiler, J. (2014). Spoken Spanish language development at the high school level: A mixed-methods study. Foreign Language Annals, 47(2), 210–240. doi:10.1111/flan.12085CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murray, L., Giralt, M., & Benini, S. (2020). Extending digital literacies: Proposing an agentive literacy to tackle the problems of distractive technologies in language learning. ReCALL, 32(3), 250–271. doi:10.1017/S0958344020000130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newman, I., & Ramlo, S. (2010). Using Q-methodology and Q factor analysis in mixed methods research. In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.), SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research (pp. 505–530). Sage.10.4135/9781506335193.n20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
NIH, Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences. (2011). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences. National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar
NIH, Office of Behavioral and Social Sciences. (2018). Best practices for mixed methods research in the health sciences (2nd ed.). National Institutes of Health.Google 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. 3–50). John Benjamins.10.1075/lllt.13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Omidian, T., Shahriari, H., & Siyanova-Chanturia, A. (2018). A cross-disciplinary investigation of multi-word expressions in the moves of research article abstracts. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 36, 1–14. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2018.08.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. T. (2014). Using Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory to enhance interpretive consistency in mixed research. International Journal of Research in Education Methodology, 5(2), 651–661. doi:10.24297/ijrem.v5i2.3910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Collins, K. M. T. (2007). A typology of mixed methods sampling designs in social science research. The Qualitative Report, 12(2), 281–316. doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2007.1638Google Scholar
Onwuegbuzie, A. J., & Corrigan, J. A. (2014). Improving the quality of mixed research reports in the field of human resource development and beyond: A call for rigor as an ethical practice. Human Resource Development Quarterly, 25(3), 273–299. doi:10.1002/hrdq.21197CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Patton, M. Q. (2014). Qualitative research & evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice. Sage.Google Scholar
Plano Clark, V. L., & Ivankova, N. V. (2015). Mixed methods research: A guide to the field. Sage.Google Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2013). Study quality in SLA: An assessment of designs, analyses, and reporting practices in quantitative L2 research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 35(4), 655–687. doi:10.1017/S0272263113000399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2014). Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990-2010): A methodological synthesis and call for reform. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 450–470. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12058.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2017). Quantitative research methods. In Loewen, S. & Sato, M. (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language acquisition (pp. 505–521). Taylor and Francis.10.4324/9781315676968-28CrossRefGoogle 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.10.4324/9781315870908-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Razfar, A., & Simon, J. (2011). Course-taking patterns of Latino ESL students: Mobility and mainstreaming in urban community colleges in the United States. TESOL Quarterly, 45(4), 595–627. doi:10.5054/tq.2011.268060CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Révész, A., Michel, M., & Lee, M. (2019). Exploring second language writers' pausing and revision behaviors: A mixed-methods study. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 41(3), 605–631. doi:10.1017/s027226311900024xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riazi, A. M. (2016). Innovative mixed-methods research: Moving beyond design technicalities to epistemological and methodological realizations. Applied Linguistics, 37(1), 33–49. doi:10.1093/applin/amv064CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riazi, A. M. (2017). Mixed-methods research in language teaching and learning. Equinox.Google Scholar
Riazi, A. M. (2018). Mixed methods approaches to studying second language writing. The TESOL Encyclopedia of English Language Teaching, 1–6. doi:10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0562Google 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. doi:10.1017/s0261444813000505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riazi, A. M., Ghanbar, H., & Fazel, I. (2020). The contexts, the theoretical and methodological orientation of EAP research: Evidence from empirical articles published in the Journal of English for Academic Purposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 48, 100925. doi:10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100925CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Riazi, A. M., Ghanbar, H., Marefat, H., & Fazel, I. (in press). Review and analysis of empirical articles published in Tesol Quarterly over its lifespan. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching (SSLLT).Google Scholar
Riazi, A. M., Shi, L., & Haggerty, J. (2018). Analysis of the empirical research in the journal of second language writing at its 25th year (1992–2016). Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 41–54. doi:10.1016/j.jslw.2018.07.002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sampson, R. (2012). The language-learning self, self-enhancement activities, and self-perceptual change. Language Teaching Research, 16(3), 317–335. doi:10.1177/1362168812436898CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sato, M. (2013). Beliefs about peer interaction and peer corrective feedback: Efficacy of classroom intervention. Modern Language Journal, 97(3), 611–633. doi:10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12035.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schoonenboom, J., & Johnson, R. B. (2017). How to construct a mixed methods research design. Kolner Zeitschrift fur Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 69(Suppl 2), 107. doi:10.1007/s11577-017-0454-1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schoonenboom, R., Johnson, R. B., & Froehlich, D. E. (2018). Combining multiple purposes of mixing within a mixed methods research design. International Journal of Multiple Research Approaches, 10(1), 271–282. doi:10.29034/ijmra.v10n1a17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwartz, M., & Gorbatt, N. (2017). “There is no need for translation: She understands”: Teachers’ mediation strategies in a bilingual preschool classroom. Modern Language Journal, 101(1), 143–162. doi:10.1111/modl.12384CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Singleton, D., & Pfenninger, S. E. (2015). Insights from a mixed methods approach with respect to age and long-term instructed language learning. In Navracsics, J. & Bátyi, S. (Eds.), First and second language: Interdisciplinary approaches (pp. 11–21). Tinta Könyvkiadó.Google Scholar
Tahamtan, I., Afshar, A. S., & Ahmadzadeh, K. (2016). Factors affecting number of citations: A comprehensive review of the literature. Scientometrics, 107(3), 1195–1225. doi:10.1007/s11192-016-1889-2CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2009). Integrating qualitative and quantitative approaches to research. In Tashakkori, A. & Teddlie, C. (Eds.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp. 283–318). Sage. doi:10.4135/9781483348858.n9Google Scholar
Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Putting the human back in ‘‘human research methodology’’: The researcher in mixed methods research. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 4(4), 271–277. doi:10.1177/1558689810382CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tazik, K., Khani, R., & Aliakbari, M. (2020). Trends of research methods in applied linguistics: The case of research articles published between 1986 and 2015. Scientific Journal of Language Research, 12(36), 87–108.Google Scholar
Teddlie, C., & Tashakkori, A. (2006). A general typology of research designs featuring mixed methods. Research in the Schools, 13(1), 12–28.Google Scholar
Tian, J., & Low, G. D. (2012). To what extent are postgraduate students from China prepared for academic writing needed on UK master's courses? Language, Culture and Curriculum, 25(3), 299–319. doi:10.1080/07908318.2012.734313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tsushima, R. (2015). Methodological diversity in language assessment research: The role of mixed methods in classroom-based language assessment studies. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 14(2), 104–121. doi:10.1177/160940691501400202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Kemenade, E., Pupius, M., & Hardjono, T. W. (2008). More value to defining quality. Quality in Higher Education, 14(2), 175–185. doi:10.1080/13538320802278461CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Watts, S., & Stenner, P. (2005). Doing Q-methodological research: Theory, method and interpretation. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 2(1), 67–91. doi:10.4135/9781446251911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yaw, K., Plonsky, L., Larsson, T., Sterling, S., & Kytö, M. (2023). Research ethics in applied linguistics. Language Teaching, 1–17. doi:10.1017/S0261444823000010Google Scholar
Zhang, X. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of second language acquisition between 1997 and 2018. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 199–222. doi:10.1017/s0272263119000573CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Y., Lu, X., & Ren, W. (2019). Profiling Chinese university students’ motivation to learn multiple languages. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 40(7), 590–604. doi:10.1080/01434632.2019.1571074CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zheng, Y., Lu, X., & Ren, W. (2020). Tracking the evolution of Chinese learners’ multilingual motivation through a longitudinal Q methodology. Modern Language Journal, 104(4), 781–803. doi:10.1111/modl.12672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Riazi and Farsani supplementary material

Riazi and Farsani supplementary material
Download Riazi and Farsani supplementary material(File)
File 164.1 KB