ru
Feedback

Не попадитесь на канал ботавода! Telemetrio находит и помечает такие каналы 👉 Хотите видеть метку — оформите подписку

Research Methods in AL

Research Methods in AL

Открыть в Telegram
1 370
Подписчики
Нет данных24 часа
+27 дней
+430 дней

Загружаем данные

Привлечение подписчиков
нояб. '26
ноябрь '26
+7
в 0 каналах
октябрь '26
+16
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
сентябрь '26
+17
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
август '26
+22
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
июль '26
+9
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
июнь '26
+17
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
май '26
+14
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
апрель '26
+8
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
март '26
+7
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
февраль '26
+18
в 3 каналах
Get PRO
январь '26
+14
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
декабрь '25
+33
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
ноябрь '25
+53
в 2 каналах
Get PRO
октябрь '25
+27
в 2 каналах
Get PRO
сентябрь '25
+19
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
август '25
+14
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
июль '25
+28
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
июнь '25
+24
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
май '25
+18
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
апрель '25
+17
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
март '25
+24
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
февраль '25
+52
в 2 каналах
Get PRO
январь '25
+41
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
декабрь '24
+71
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
ноябрь '24
+78
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
октябрь '24
+110
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
сентябрь '24
+102
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
август '24
+49
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
июль '24
+28
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
июнь '24
+36
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
май '24
+61
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
апрель '24
+37
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
март '24
+47
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
февраль '24
+64
в 0 каналах
Get PRO
январь '24
+119
в 2 каналах
Get PRO
декабрь '23
+134
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
ноябрь '23
+132
в 1 каналах
Get PRO
октябрь '23
+409
в 0 каналах
Дата
Привлечение подписчиков
Упоминания
Каналы
09 ноября+1
08 ноября0
07 ноября+2
06 ноября0
05 ноября0
04 ноября+2
03 ноября+1
02 ноября0
01 ноября+1
Посты канала
📊 Analyze → Dimension Reduction → Optimal Scaling is one of the less often explained options in SPSS. I want to show where i
📊 Analyze → Dimension Reduction → Optimal Scaling is one of the less often explained options in SPSS. I want to show where it can help us make sense of categorical and ordinal data in applied linguistics. Suppose we ask learners how often they use AI for L2 writing: never, occasionally, or often. Coding these responses as 1, 2, and 3 gives them an order, but it does not tell us that the gap between never and occasionally is the same as the gap between occasionally and often. Now consider preferred feedback type: direct correction, explanation, or guiding questions. Those categories have no inherent order. Optimal scaling lets SPSS assign numerical scores to categories as part of the analysis. For an ordinal variable, we can preserve the order while allowing the gaps to differ. For a nominal variable, the numbers we used to enter the categories do not impose an order on the analysis. The menu leads to three procedures, depending on the question we want to answer: 1. Multiple Correspondence Analysis (MCA) Use it to explore which response categories tend to occur together across several nominal variables. For example, we could map learners’ preferred AI modality, main writing activity, and preferred feedback type to see which combinations recur. In SPSS: All variables multiple nominal → One set. 2. Categorical Principal Components Analysis (CATPCA) Use it to summarise one set of variables that may include ordered and unordered responses. For example, we could ask whether a few components capture the main patterns across learners’ frequency of AI use, confidence in revising, and preferred feedback type. In SPSS: Some variable(s) not multiple nominal → One set. 3. Nonlinear Canonical Correlation Analysis (OVERALS) Use it to explore how two or more sets of variables relate to one another. For example, one set could describe learners’ AI use, while another describes their planning, monitoring, and revision practices. The sets are groups of variables measured on the same learners. In SPSS: Multiple sets. For questionnaire research, I would use CATPCA to explore and summarise response patterns. If my question is whether the items measure proposed latent constructs, I would use a factor model suited to the item responses. The choice begins with what we want to learn from the data. Dr. Hessameddin Ghanbar

2
📊 In this post, I want to explain what the Analyze → Bayesian Statistics menu in SPSS offers for applied linguistics research. Bayesian analysis combines a prior distribution—our assumptions about plausible parameter values before analysing the current data—with the likelihood from the observed data to obtain a posterior distribution. We can then estimate parameters using credible intervals and, in several procedures, compare hypotheses using Bayes factors. This helps distinguish evidence supporting a null hypothesis from data that provide little discrimination between hypotheses. The options in this screenshot serve the following purposes: 1. One Sample Normal Estimates a population mean or evaluates it against a reference value. Example: Comparing learners’ mean reading score with a predefined benchmark. 2. One Sample Binomial Estimates a proportion or probability for an outcome with two categories. Example: Estimating the proportion of learners who meet a specified proficiency criterion. 3. One Sample Poisson Estimates a mean count under a Poisson model. Example: Examining the average number of target-form errors in equal-length texts, where the Poisson assumptions are appropriate. 4. Related Samples Normal Examines the mean difference between paired measurements. Example: Comparing the same learners’ vocabulary scores before and after instruction. 5. Independent Samples Normal Examines the mean difference between two independent groups. Example: Comparing writing scores between groups receiving different feedback approaches. 6. Pearson Correlation Examines the linear association between two quantitative variables. Example: Investigating the relationship between vocabulary size and reading comprehension. 7. Linear Regression Models a quantitative outcome using one or more predictors. Example: Examining how vocabulary knowledge and working memory relate to writing performance. 8. One-way ANOVA Examines group means across levels of one factor. Example: Comparing writing scores across three teaching approaches. 9. Loglinear Models Examines association between two categorical variables using contingency-table counts. Example: Investigating whether teacher-training participation is associated with preferred feedback type. 10. One-way Repeated Measures ANOVA Examines measurements from the same participants across times or conditions. Example: Comparing vocabulary scores at pretest, immediate posttest, and delayed posttest. A note on interpretation: A 95% credible interval contains 95% of the posterior probability for the parameter, conditional on the specified model, prior, and observed data. For a comparison between two feedback approaches, a hypothetical BF₁₀ = 5 means that the observed data are five times as probable under the specified alternative model as under the null model. BF₀₁ = 5 favours the null model by the same ratio. Always check the direction of the ratio. My advice is to choose the procedure according to the research question, outcome type, and design; check its assumptions; and report the prior settings. Where possible, examine whether the conclusions remain similar under other defensible priors. Dr. Hessameddin Ghanbar
166
3
Bayesian Statistics menu in SPSS
Bayesian Statistics menu in SPSS
160
4
This example is helpful
This example is helpful
282
5
📊 Three options in SPSS MANOVA that deserve a closer look I would like to clarify the three highlighted options in this scre
📊 Three options in SPSS MANOVA that deserve a closer look I would like to clarify the three highlighted options in this screenshot through one example from applied linguistics. Suppose we are comparing three teaching approaches—A, B, and C—on learners’ L2 reading and writing scores. What would each option add to our analysis? 1. Spread vs. level plots These plots show the relationship between the group means and their standard deviations or variances, separately for each dependent variable. They help us examine whether variability changes across groups. In our example, the approach with the highest average writing score might also have the greatest variation among learners. This would prompt us to examine the equality-of-variance assumption more carefully. I would interpret these plots alongside Levene’s tests, group sizes, and other diagnostics. With only three groups, the visual evidence is limited; an apparently flat pattern alone cannot establish equal variances. 2. Residual SSCP matrix SSCP stands for Sums of Squares and Cross-Products. A residual is the difference between a learner’s observed score and the score predicted by our model. The diagonal entries contain the residual sums of squares for reading and writing. The off-diagonal entries contain cross-products showing how the two sets of residuals vary together. SPSS also provides the corresponding residual covariance and correlation matrices. In our example, a positive residual correlation would mean that learners who score above their model-predicted reading score also tend to score above their model-predicted writing score. This helps us understand the relationship between the outcomes that remains after accounting for teaching approach. Equality of covariance matrices across groups is a separate question, examined using Box’s M test. 3. General estimable function(s) This option displays the general form of the combinations of model parameters that our data and design allow us to estimate uniquely. It is useful when constructing custom comparisons, especially in complex designs with missing combinations of factor levels. Returning to our example, we might have a theoretical reason to compare Approach A with the average of Approaches B and C. The contrast weights would be 1, −0.5, −0.5. The general estimable functions output helps us construct and check such a comparison. The comparison itself must be specified separately, for example through LMATRIX syntax. Selecting the checkbox simply requests the supporting table. My advice is to connect each option to a clear analytical question: What assumption am I examining, what relationship am I inspecting, or what comparison do I want to test?
273
6
🔎 Two Advanced Options in SPSS MANOVA Within the Analyze → General Linear Model → Multivariate → Options menu, two specific
🔎 Two Advanced Options in SPSS MANOVA Within the Analyze → General Linear Model → Multivariate → Options menu, two specific settings warrant further clarification: SSCP matrices and General estimable function(s). 1. SSCP Matrices The acronym SSCP denotes Sums of Squares and Cross-Products. Enabling this option generates two distinct matrices: • Hypothesis matrix (H): This matrix summarizes the variation and covariation associated with the specific effect under investigation, such as teaching method. • Error matrix (E): This matrix summarizes the variation and covariation that remains unexplained by the fitted model. IBM classifies these as the hypothesis and error SSCP matrices. Assume the dependent variables are reading and writing scores. The diagonal elements of each matrix contain the sums of squares for the individual outcomes. The off-diagonal elements contain cross-products, which quantify how the outcomes vary jointly for the relevant hypothesis or residual component. These matrices constitute the mathematical basis for multivariate statistics, including Pillai’s trace and Wilks’ lambda. They elucidate the mechanism by which MANOVA evaluates multiple outcomes simultaneously. Application: This option is useful when instructing on MANOVA, examining the underlying mathematical structure, or verifying calculations with increased precision. 2. General Estimable Function(s) An estimable function is defined as a linear combination of model parameters that can be uniquely estimated from the available data and model design. This option displays the general structure of these estimable combinations. It assists researchers in constructing or verifying custom hypothesis tests, particularly in complex designs where certain combinations of factor levels lack observations. For instance, with three teaching methods, one may wish to compare Method A with the average of Methods B and C. The corresponding contrast utilizes weights of 1, −0.5, and −0.5. General estimable functions facilitate the verification of whether the proposed parameter combination is supported by the fitted design. Selecting this checkbox does not automatically execute the comparison. The hypothesis must be specified separately, for example, through SPSS’s LMATRIX syntax. Necessity of Selection: These options are not required for every MANOVA analysis. Both settings request additional technical output. Leaving them unchecked does not impede SPSS from computing the standard MANOVA tests; they should be selected only when their output serves a specific analytical or instructional purpose.
484
7
Нет текста...
425
8
Dear colleagues, The Center for Language Acquisition is excited to announce Foundational Dialogues in Second Language Studies, a free webinar series. Featuring distinguished scholars, the series considers key questions pertaining to processes of second language acquisition, the role of instruction, the state of knowledge in the field, and how we may move forward, among other important topics. The aim of the series is that by bringing together scholars with distinct perspectives to examine and interrogate a particular topic from different angles, new insights may emerge as well as new possibilities for future studies and collaborations. The first Dialogue will feature Robert DeKeyser (Professor Emeritus, University of Maryland) and Shawn Loewen (Professor, Michigan State University) as they engage with the topic Basic Research and Classroom Research: Applying Findings. The webinar will be Wednesday, October 14th, from 10:00AM-11:30AM EST. The event is free with registration. Please register here: https://psu.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_4wkHAr37TdquWBxvUxjv8Q
366
9
Keyser Loewen_APLNG_Invited Speaker Flyer_F26.pdf
320
10
Нет текста...
347
11
Нет текста...
344
12
Нет текста...
336
13
Нет текста...
331
14
Нет текста...
311
15
Нет текста...
429
16
Nexus Analysis is a powerful methodological approach used in qualitative research to study complex social actions by mapping
Nexus Analysis is a powerful methodological approach used in qualitative research to study complex social actions by mapping the intersection of discourse, historical habit, and social structure. It shifts the primary focus of study away from language, culture, or social groups, placing human action within the moment as the central unit of analysis. Conceptualized by Ron Scollon and Suzie Wong Scollon in their seminal work Nexus Analysis: Discourse and the Emerging Internet (2004), the method is situated within the broader framework of Mediated Discourse Analysis (MDA).
571
17
Нет текста...
466
18
Нет текста...
460
19
Contemporary Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: Perspectives, Debates, and Futures 🏛 Publisher: John Benjamins Publishing Company 📚 Series: Research Methods in Applied Linguistics (RMAL) ✍️ Editor: Hessameddin Ghanbar — Islamic Azad University, Fereshtegaan International Branch, Tehran, Iran 🗓 Fortcoming: Early 2028 Foreword Sal Consoli — University of Edinburgh, United Kingdom Chapter 1 Introduction: Contemporary Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: Reorientations, Debates, and Methodological Futures Hessameddin Ghanbar — Islamic Azad University, Fereshtegaan International Branch, Tehran, Iran PART I: RECONSIDERING METHODOLOGICAL COMMITMENTS AND INTERPRETIVE QUALITY Chapter 2 Methodological Adaptation without Epistemological Drift: Rethinking Qualitative Innovation in Applied Linguistics Hessameddin Ghanbar — Islamic Azad University, Fereshtegaan International Branch, Tehran, Iran Chapter 3 Reconsidering Replication in Qualitative Applied Linguistics Kevin McManus — University of Pittsburgh, USA Chapter 4 From Codes to Claims: Thematic Analysis, Qualitative Content Analysis, and Interpretive Quality in Applied Linguistics Brian Hibbs — Dalton State College, USA Chapter 5 Making Lived Experience Analytically Visible: Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis in Applied Linguistics Rohan K. Willis — University of Auckland, New Zealand Chapter 6 When the Researcher Becomes Evidence: Memory, Interpretation, and Accountability in Autoethnographic Inquiry Bedrettin Yazan — The University of Texas at San Antonio, USA PART II: EXTENDING SITUATED, RELATIONAL, AND DYNAMIC QUALITATIVE INQUIRY Chapter 7 Nexus Analysis: An Integrative Methodology for Critical, Relational Inquiry in Multilingual Education D. Philip Montgomery — Nazarbayev University, Kazakhstan Aiym Zhumabayeva — Zimran, Kazakhstan Chapter 8 Going Through Language and Place: Conceptualising Go-Alongs as Mobile Qualitative Inquiry in Applied Linguistics Yingqiu Chen — College of Foreign Languages, Fujian Normal University, China Louisa Buckingham — University of Auckland, New Zealand Chapter 9 Retrodictive Qualitative Modelling in Applied Linguistics: Tracing Dynamic Systems from Outcomes to Developmental Pathways Özkan Kırmızı — Karabük University, Türkiye Chapter 10 Quality Time: Designing for Kairos in Interventionist Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics Jacob Rieker and Meredith Doran — The Pennsylvania State University, USA Chapter 11 When Pedagogy Becomes Data: Reflective Practice as Teaching and Qualitative Research Lena Barrantes-Elizondo — Universidad Nacional, Costa Rica Joshua Gordon — University of Northern Iowa, USA PART III: INCLUSION, EPISTEMIC JUSTICE, AND EMERGING METHODOLOGICAL RESPONSIBILITIES Chapter 12 From Ngopi to Sangkep Banjar: A Decolonial Framework for Relational Inquiry and Community-Governed Knowledge Co-Creation I Kadek Purnawan — Nanzan University, Japan Chapter 13 Designing Disability-Inclusive Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics: From Conceptualization to Circulation Caitlin Cornell — Michigan State University, USA Chapter 14 Accessibility as Epistemic Justice: Feminist Disability Ethnography, Institutional Power and Inclusive Qualitative Research in Applied Linguistics Rebecca Fish — University of Lancashire, United Kingdom Chapter 15 What Counts as Evidence? Conversation Analysis, Participant Accounts, and Disability-Inclusive Qualitative Research James Alvis Carpenter — Tsurumi University, Japan Chapter 16 Beyond Procedural Ethics: Relational and Reflexive Decision-Making Throughout the Research Process Carlo Cinaglia and Emil Asanov — Florida State University, USA Chapter 17 The Methodological Footprint of Generative AI: Interpretation and Ethical Responsibility in Qualitative Research Pei-Jung Li — University of Georgia, USA Jessica Nina Lester — Indiana University Bloomington, USA Afterword Peter I. De Costa — Michigan State University, USA
449
20
Нет текста...
393