Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
  • Print publication year: 2021
  • Online publication date: February 2021

8 - Meta-Analysis and Research Synthesis

from Part II - Methodological Approaches in the Study of Corrective Feedback

Summary

This chapter introduces the methodological tools of research synthesis in the context of corrective feedback (CF) research and highlights findings in this area generated by synthetic approaches. Meta-analysis, the most common approach to research synthesis in applied linguistics, has quickly gained much popularity in CF research, with at least twenty meta-analyses conducted on CF by the time of this publication (more than in any other area of applied linguistics research). The chapter describes the value of research synthesis to CF research and how meta-analyses have helped consolidate findings in this domain and provided insight into the range of moderating variables that may influence the effectiveness of CF. Methodological synthesis, a type of research synthesis used for taking inventory of methodological approaches, has also provided guidance for future advancements in designing research methodology in this domain, which are explored. The chapter concludes by summarizing the contributions of research synthesis within CF research and provides cautious guidance in the interpretation of findings in synthetic research.

Biber, D., Nekrasova, T. & Horn, B. (2011). The effectiveness of feedback for L1-English and L2-writing development: A meta-analysis. TOEFL iBT Re-search Report No. TOEFLiBT-14. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
Bitchener, J., Young, S. & Cameron, D. (2005). The effect of different types of corrective feedback on ESL student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 14(3), 191205.
Borenstein, M., Hedges, L. V., Higgins, J. P. T. & Rothstein, H. R. (2009). Introduction to Meta-analysis. Chichester: Wiley.
Brown, D. (2016). The type and linguistic foci of oral corrective feedback in the L2 classroom: A meta-analysis. Language Teaching Research, 20(4), 436458.
Bruton, A. (2010). Another reply to Truscott on error correction: Improved situated designs over statistics. System, 38, 491498. DOI:10.1016/j.system.2010.07.001.
Chandler, J. (2003). The efficacy of various kinds of error feedback for improvement in the accuracy and fluency of L2 student writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 12(3), 267296.
Chen, T. (2016). Technology-supported peer feedback in ESL/EFL writing classes: A research synthesis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 365397.
Chen, T. & Lin, H. (2012, March). Effects of peer feedback on EFL/ESL writing improvement: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the Georgetown University Roundtable on Linguistics and Languages (GURT), Georgetown University, Washington, DC.
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.
Cooper, H. (2010). Research Synthesis and Meta-analysis: A Step-by-Step Approach (4th edn.). Los Angeles: Sage.
Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V. & Valentine, J. C. (eds.). (2009). The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (2nd ed.), New York: Russell Sage Foundations.
Derrick, D. J. (2016). Instrument reporting practices in second language research. TESOL Quarterly, 50, 132153. DOI:10.1002/tesq.217.
Duppenthale, P. (2002). Feedback and Japanese high school English language journal writing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Temple University.
Ferris, D. R. (1999). The case for grammar correction in L2 writing classes: A response to Truscott (1996). Journal of Second Language Writing, 8(1), 111.
Ferris, D. R. (2004). The “Grammar correction” debate in L2 writing: Where are we, and where do we go from here? (and what do we do in the meantime …?). Journal of Second Language Writing, 13(1), 4962.
Ferris, D. R. (2010). Second language writing research and written corrective feedback in SLA. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 181201.
Hendrickson, J. M. (1977). The effects of error correction treatments upon adequate and accurate communication in the written compositions of adult learners of English as a second language. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University.
Kang, E. & Han, Z. (2015). The efficacy of written corrective feedback in improving L2 written accuracy: A meta-analysis. Modern Language Journal, 99(1), 118.
Kao, C. W. & Wible, D. (2011). The distinction between focused and unfocused grammar feedback matters: A meta-analysis. Paper presented at the Second Language Research Forum, Ames, IA, October.
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 J. M. Norris and L. Ortega (eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 91–131). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Lee, J., Jang, J. & Plonsky, L. (2015). The effectiveness of second language pronunciation instruction: A meta-analysis. Applied Linguistics, 36(3), 345366.
Li, S. (2010). The effectiveness of corrective feedback in SLA: A meta-analysis. Language Learning, 60(2), 309365. DOI:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00561.x.
Lipsey, M. W. & Wilson, D. B. (2001). Practical meta-analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Liu, Q. & Brown, D. (2015). A methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 6681.
Lyster, R. & Saito, K. (2010). Oral feedback in classroom SLA: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 32(2), 265302. DOI:10.1017/S0272263109990520.
Mackey, A. & Goo, J. (2007). Interaction research in SLA: A meta-analysis and research synthesis. In A. Mackey, (ed.), Conversational interaction in second language acquisition: A collection of empirical studies (pp. 407451). New York: Oxford University Press,
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. Advance online publication. DOI:10.1111/lang.12286.
Marsden, E., Thompson, S. & Plonsky, L. (2018). A methodological synthesis of self-paced reading in second language research. Applied Psycholinguistics. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000036.
Miller, P. C. (2003). The effectiveness of corrective feedback: A meta-analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN.
Miller, P. C. and Pan, W. (2012). Recasts in the L2 classroom: A meta-analytic review. International Journal of Educational Research, 56, 4859. doi: 10.1016/j.ijer.2012.07.002.
Nassaji, H. (2015). Interactional feedback dimension in instructed second language learning. London: Bloomsbury Publishing.
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), 535562.
Nicholas, H., Lightbown, P. M. & Spada, N. (2001). Recasts as feedback to language learners. Language Learning, 51(4), 719758.
Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta-analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417528.
Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (eds.). (2006). Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching. Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Norris, J. M. & Ortega, L. (2007). The future of research synthesis in applied linguistics: Beyond art or science. TESOL Quarterly, 41(4), 805815.
Ortega, L. (2015). Research synthesis. In Paltridge, B. & Phakiti, A. (eds.), Research methods in applied linguistics: A practical resource (pp. 225244). London: Bloomsbury.
Oswald, F. L. & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis in second language research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 85110.
Papaioannou, D., Sutton, A., Carroll, C., Booth, A. & Wong, R. (2009). Literature searching for social science systematic reviews: Consideration of a range of search techniques. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 27, 114122. DOI: 10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00863.x.
Plonsky, L. (2012). Replication, meta-analysis, and generalizability. In Porte, G. (ed.), Replication Research in Applied Linguistics (pp. 116–132). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
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), 655687.
Plonsky, L. (2014). Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990–2010): A methodological synthesis and call for reform. Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 450470.
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), 267278.
Plonsky, L. & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative research methods, study quality, and outcomes: The case of interaction research. Language Learning, 61(2), 325366.
Plonsky, L. & Gonulal, T. (2015). Methodological synthesis in quantitative L2 research: A review of reviews and a case study of exploratory factor analysis. Language Learning, 65(Suppl. 1), 936.
Plonsky, L. & Kim, Y. (2016). Task-based learner production: A substantive and methodological review. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 36, 7397.
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2012). How to do a meta-analysis. In A. Mackey, , Gass, S. M., Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (eds.), Research methods in second language acquisition: A practical guide (pp. 275295). Blackwell Publishing.
Plonsky, L. & Oswald, F. L. (2014). How big is “big”? Interpreting effect sizes in L2 research. Language Learning, 64(4), 878912.
Poltavtchenko, E. & Johnson, M. D. (2009). Feedback and second language writing: A meta-analysis. Poster session presented at the annual meeting of TESOL, Denver, CO, March.
Porte, G. (ed.). (2012). Replication research in applied linguistics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Riazi, 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, 4154.
Rothstein, H. R., Sutton, A. J. & Borenstein, M. (eds.). (2005). Publication bias in meta-analysis: Prevention, assessment and adjustments. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Russell, J. & Spada, N. (2006). The effectiveness of corrective feedback for the acquisition of L2 grammar: A meta-analysis of the research. In J. M. Norris, and L. Ortega, (eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 133–164). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.
Sheppard, K. (1992). Two feedback types: Do they make a difference? RELC Journal, 23, 103110.
Sok, S., Kang, E. Y. & Han, Z. (2018). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A methodological synthesis. Language Teaching Research. Advance online publication. DOI:10.1177/1362168818776673.
Storch, N. (2010). Critical feedback on written corrective feedback research. International Journal of English Studies, 10(2), 2946. DOI:10.6018/ijes/2010/2/119181.
Thirakunkovit, S. P. & Chamcharatsri, P. B. (2019). A meta-analysis of effectiveness of teacher and peer feedback: Implications for writing instructions and research. Asian EFL Journal, 21(1), 140170.
Truscott, J. (1996). The case against grammar correction in L2 writing classes. Language Learning, 46(2), 327369.
Truscott, J. (2007). The effect of error correction on learners’ ability to write accurately. Journal of Second Language Writing, 16(4), 255272. DOI:10.1016/j.jslw.2007.06.003.
Yousefi, M. & Nassaji, H. (2018). The effect of computer-mediated vs. face-to-face instruction on L2 pragmatics: A meta-analysis. International Journal of Cognitive and Language Sciences, 12(7), 620624.
Ziegler, N. (2013). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A research synthesis and meta-analysis. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgetown University.
Ziegler, N. (2016). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction: A meta-analysis. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 553586.