Introduction In:
International Journal of Learner Corpus Research: Online-First Articles
Introduction

Encouraging cumulative knowledge building as normal practice in (learner) corpus research

ORCID logo | Northern Arizona University
 | Northern Arizona University
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Cumulative knowledge building: What is it and why is it important?
  • 3.Approaches to systematic knowledge accrual in secondary research
  • 4.What cumulative knowledge building could look like as normal practice in primary research
    • 4.1Designing and motivating the need for a new study
    • 4.2The role of specific hypotheses
    • 4.3Discussing results and looking ahead
  • 5.Overview of the articles in this special issue
  • 6.Concluding words
  • Notes
  • Author queries
  • References
This content is being prepared for publication; it may be subject to changes.
References (32)
References
Andersson, E., McPhearson, T., & Pickett, S. T. (2024). From urban ecology to urban enquiry: How to build cumulative and context-sensitive understandings. Ambio, 53 (6), 813–825. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bazerman, C. 1988. Shaping written knowledge: the genre and activity of the experimental article in science. University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
Borenstein, M., & Hedges, L. V. (2019). Effect sizes for meta-analysis. In H. Cooper, L. Hedges & J. Valentine (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis, (Vol. 31, pp. 207–243). Russell Sage Foundation. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chong, S. W., & Plonsky, L. (2024). A typology of secondary research in Applied Linguistics. Applied Linguistics Review, 15 (4), 1569–1594. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Bruin, A., Brush, C. G., & Welter, F. (2006). Introduction to the special issue: Towards building cumulative knowledge on women’s entrepreneurship. Entrepreneurship Theory and Practice, 30 (5), 585–593. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellemers, N. (2021). Science as collaborative knowledge generation. British Journal of Social Psychology, 60 (1), 1–28. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glass, G. V. (1976). Primary, secondary, and meta-analysis of research. Educational Researcher, 5 (10), 3–8. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Isager, P. M., Van Aert, R. C. M., Bahník, Š., Brandt, M. J., DeSoto, K. A., Giner-Sorolla, R., Krueger, J. I., Perugini, M., Ropovik, I., van ’T Veer, A. E., Vranka, M., & Lakens, D. (2023). Deciding what to replicate: A decision model for replication study selection under resource and knowledge constraints. Psychological Methods, 28 (2), 438–451. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Larsson, T., Biber, D., & Hancock, G. R. (forthcoming). On the role of cumulative knowledge building and specific hypotheses: The case of grammatical complexity. Corpora, 19 (3). DOI logo
Liu, Y., & Lu, X. (2024). Development of verb argument constructions in L2 English learners: A close replication of research question 3 in Römer and Berger (2019). Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 1–19. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McEnery, T., and Brezina, V. (2022). Fundamental principles of corpus linguistics. Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
McManus, K. (forthcoming). Replication studies in Second Language Acquisition research: Definitions, issues, resources, and future directions. Studies in Second Language Acquisition.
Mizumoto, A., Plonsky, L., & Egbert, J. (2021). Meta-analyzing corpus linguistic research. In M. Paquot & S. Th. Gries (Eds), A practical handbook of corpus linguistics (pp. 663–688). Springer International Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Mouton, M. (2020). A case for project based learning to enact semantic waves: towards cumulative knowledge building. Journal of Biological Education, 54 (4), 363–380. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50 (3), 417–528. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Norris, J. M. & L. Ortega (Eds.) (2006). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Rourke, K. (2007). An historical perspective on meta-analysis: Dealing quantitatively with varying study results. Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 100 (12), 579–582. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paquot, M. (2018). Phraseological competence: A missing component in university entrance language tests? Insights from a study of EFL learners’ use of statistical collocations. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15 (1), 121–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2019). The phraseological dimension in interlanguage complexity research. Second Language Research, 35 (1), 121–145. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paquot, M., & Plonsky, L. (2017). Quantitative research methods and study quality in learner corpus research. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 3 (1), 61–94. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L. (2014). Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990–2010): A methodological synthesis and call for reform. The Modern Language Journal, 98 (1), 450–470. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. L. (2012). How to do a meta-analysis. In A. Mackey & S. M. Gass (Eds.), Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide (pp. 275–295). Basil Blackwell.Google Scholar
Porte, G., & McManus, K. (2019). Doing replication research in applied linguistics. Routledge.Google Scholar
Rubin, R., Housen, A., & Paquot, M. (2021). Phraseological complexity as an index of L2 Dutch writing proficiency: A partial replication study. In S. Granger (Ed.), Perspectives on L2 phrasican: The view from learner corpora (pp. 101–125). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ross, S. (1998). Self-assessment in second language testing: A meta-analysis and analysis of experiential factors. Language Testing, 15 (1), 1–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, F. L., & Hunter, J. E. (1977). Development of a general solution to the problem of validity generalization. Journal of Applied Psychology, 62 (5), 529–540. [URL]. DOI logo
Snyder, H. (2019). Literature review as a research methodology: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 104 1, 333–339. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stengers, H., Boers, F., Housen, A., & Eyckmans, J. (2011). Formulaic sequences and L2 oral proficiency : Does the type of target language influence the association? International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 49 (4), 321–343. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Trikalinos, T. A., Salanti, G., Zintzaras, E., & Ioannidis, J. P. (2008). Meta-analysis methods. Advances in Genetics, 60 1, 311–334. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Uman, L. S. (2011). Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal of the Canadian Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry/Journal de l’Academie canadienne de psychiatrie de l’enfant et de l’adolescent, 20 (1), 57–59.Google Scholar
Vanderweerd, N., Housen, A., & Paquot, M. (2021). Applying phraseological complexity measures to L2 French: A partial replication study. International Journal of Learner Corpus Research, 7 (2), 197–229. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Zeigler, D. (2012). Evolution and the cumulative nature of science. Evo Edu Outreach, 5 1, 585–588. DOI logoGoogle Scholar