The study examined how learners’ motivational dispositions predict the complexity, accuracy, fluency of their oral task performance and their overall second language proficiency. Eighty-one speakers of English as a second language in the United States completed a regulatory focus and a regulatory mode questionnaire, an oral interview task, and a picture description task. Regression analyses showed a meaningful pattern of results. The assessment mode (concerned with analysis, evaluation, and comparison) contributed to syntactic and lexical complexity, the reduction of dysfluencies, and overall English proficiency, whereas the locomotion mode (concerned with acting without deliberation) positively predicted the speed measure of fluency and the total number of errors. The prevention focus (concerned with stability, security, and safety) negatively predicted lexical sophistication, whereas the promotion focus (concerned with advancement, accomplishments, and growth) predicted overall English proficiency. Theoretical and instructional implications were discussed.

The present meta-analysis aimed to improve on Involvement Load Hypothesis (ILH) by incorporating it into a broader framework that predicts incidental vocabulary learning. Studies testing the ILH were systematically collected and 42 studies meeting our inclusion criteria were analyzed. The model-selection approach was used to determine the optimal statistical model (i.e., a set of predictor variables) that best predicts learning gains. Following previous findings, we investigated whether the prediction of the ILH improved by (a) examining the influence of each level of individual ILH components (need, search, and evaluation), (b) adopting optimal operationalization of the ILH components and test format grouping, and (c) including other empirically motivated variables. Results showed that the resulting models explained a greater variance in learning gains. Based on the models, we created incidental vocabulary learning formulas. Using these formulas, one can calculate the effectiveness index of activities to predict their relative effectiveness more accurately on incidental vocabulary learning.

In comparative studies focusing on context of learning, the main contexts under investigation have been study abroad (SA), at-home formal instruction (AH), and domestic immersion (IM). With the global status of English and its burgeoning popularity as a medium of instruction in countries where English only holds the status of a lingua franca, a new SA context has emerged. This study compares the L2 learning of English in this new English as a lingua franca study abroad (ELFSA) context to Anglophone SA and AH in terms of oral and written complexity, accuracy, and fluency gains. Participants’ perceptions of contextual differences concerning the amount of language contact, use, development, and their views toward English are also explored qualitatively. Apart from indicating equal development on most CAF measures after a semester, the qualitative findings highlight ELFSA as providing a low-anxiety atmosphere that helps sojourners gain ownership of English. Thus, ELFSA emerges as an appealing study abroad context for future sojourners.

Replication is a research methodology designed to verify, consolidate, and generalize knowledge and understanding within empirical fields of study. In second language studies, however, reviews share widespread concern about the infrequency of replication. A common but speculative explanation for this situation is that replication studies are not valued because they lack originality and/or innovation. To better understand and respond to the infrequency of replication in our field, 354 researchers were surveyed about their attitudes toward replication and their practices conducting replication studies. Responses included worldwide participation from researchers with and without replication experience. Overall, replications were evaluated as relevant and valuable to the field. Claims that replication studies lack originality/innovation were not supported. However, dissemination issues were identified: half of published replication studies lacked explicit labeling and one quarter of completed replications were unpublished. Explicit labeling of replication studies and training in research methodology and dissemination can address this situation.

Second language (L2) researchers have long acknowledged the role of language anxiety in communication processes, such that learners with greater language anxiety tend to be less willing to engage in communication. However, little research has explored links between L2 speakers’ perceptions of conversation and dynamic measures of anxiety. Therefore, this study measured 60 L2 English speakers’ galvanic skin response (a physiological index of anxiety) during conversation. After the conversation, speakers evaluated themselves and their partner in terms of speech fluency and comprehensibility, engagement, and anxiety, and responded to trait-anxiety and social network questionnaires. Correlational analyses explored relationships between speakers’ trait-anxiety, social network characteristics, self- and peer-perceptions and five levels of physiological response during conversation. Findings revealed that high arousal during interaction was related to speakers’ negative self-perceptions of speech fluency and negative perceptions of their partner’s engagement. Implications are discussed regarding state-anxiety as triggered by partner- or task-specific experiences.

In this focused methodological synthesis, the sample construction procedures of 110 second language (L2) instructed vocabulary interventions were assessed in relation to effect size–driven sample-size planning, randomization, and multisite usage. These three areas were investigated because inferential testing makes better generalizations when researchers consider them during the sample construction process. Only nine reports used effect sizes to plan or justify sample sizes in any fashion, with only one engaging in an a priori power procedure referencing vocabulary-centric effect sizes from previous research. Randomized assignment was observed in 56% of the reports while no report involved randomized sampling. Approximately 15% of the samples observed were constructed from multiple sites and none of these empirically investigated the effect of site clustering. Leveraging the synthesized findings, we conclude by offering suggestions for future L2 instructed vocabulary researchers to consider a priori effect size–driven sample planning processes, randomization, and multisite usage when constructing samples.

This study offers methodological synergy in the examination of factorial structure in second language (L2) research. It illustrates the effectiveness and flexibility of the recently developed exploratory structural equation modeling (ESEM) method, which integrates the advantages of exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) into one complete measurement model. Two sets of data were collected using the L2 Passion Scale, which measures a dualistic model of passion. Study 1 participants were 220 L2 students. A comparison was made between the CFA and the ESEM models. The results demonstrated the superiority of the ESEM method relative to CFA in terms of better goodness-of-fit indices and realistic correlated factors. These results were replicated in another sample of 272 L2 students, providing support for the predictive validity using a structural ESEM model. Guidelines are provided and Mplus syntax files (codes) are included to help analysts apply the methods. We also make the data available publicly. Overall, this research demonstrated the usefulness of ESEM for examining the construct, discriminant, and convergent validity of L2 scales over CFA.

Research on input processing and processing instruction has often employed a scoring method known as trials to criterion to observe the effects of instruction that emerge during training. Despite its common use in this research (see Fernández, 2021) this metric has never been evaluated critically. The present study first discusses several challenges associated with trials to criterion, including issues with its conceptual and methodological implementation. The study then introduces three alternative approaches for analyzing accuracy data collected during training sequences: trials to accuracy threshold, growth curve analysis, and bootstrapped differences of timeseries. For each approach, advantages and disadvantages are discussed and example analyses are presented using data from previous research. This discussion shows how these alternative approaches can supplement current trials-to-criterion-based analyses, expand the methodological choices available to researchers, and permit new and interesting research questions.