Cited by 126

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 4 of the 4 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Individual Differences in Second Language Learning

Ellis, Rod·2004·The Handbook of Applied Linguistics

Abstract

The prelims comprise: Introduction Methodology and Instrumentation Individual Difference Factors: A Review of the Research Conclusion

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/9780470757000.ch21

Cites

4 of 4 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Researchers have suggested that metalinguistic awareness and language aptitude can be considered partially overlapping constructs, and consequently tests of language aptitude and metalinguistic awareness may assess overlapping skills.

    “For some time, researchers have suggested that metalinguistic awareness and language aptitude can be considered partially overlapping constructs (Herdina & Jessner, 2002;Jessner, 2006); consequently, tests of language aptitude and metalinguistic awareness may assess overlapping skills (Ellis, 2004).”

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 68

  1. Bailey K., 1983, Classroom‐oriented research in second language acquisition, 67
  2. 10.1111/1467-9922.00040 · DOI
  3. 10.1017/CBO9781139524544.005 · DOI
  4. Breen M., 2001, Learner contrributions to language learning, 112
  5. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1996.tb00641.x · DOI · Paper page
  6. Carroll J., 1991, Language aptitude reconsidered, 11
  7. Carroll J., 1959, Modern Language Aptitude Test ‐ Form A
  8. Chamot A., 1987, Learner Strategies in Language Learning, 71
  9. Chamot A., 2001, Learner contrributions to language learning, 25
  10. 10.1111/j.1467-1770.1991.tb00690.x · DOI
  11. 10.1111/0023-8333.00098 · DOI
  12. Dickinson L., 1995, Autonomy, self‐direction and self access in language teaching and learning, Special issue of System, 23
  13. 10.1111/j.1540-4781.1994.tb02063.x · DOI
  14. 10.1017/CBO9780511667343 · DOI · Paper page
  15. 10.1177/136216880000400305 · DOI · Paper page
  16. Ellis R., 1994, The study of second language acquisition
  17. Eysenck H., 1964, Manual of the Eysenck Personality Inventory
  18. Gardner R., 1985, Social psychology and second language learning: the role of attitude and motivation
  19. 10.1093/applin/13.2.133 · DOI
  20. 10.1111/0026-7902.00076 · DOI
  21. 10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00062-7 · DOI
  22. Horwitz E., 1987, Learner strategies in language learning, 119
  23. Horwitz E., 1987, Foreign language learning: a research perspective, 146
  24. 10.1111/0026-7902.00085 · DOI
  25. 10.1111/0026-7902.00067 · DOI · Paper page
  26. 10.1111/0023-8333.00137 · DOI
  27. Krashen S., 1981, Second language acquisition and second language learning
  28. Kruidenier B., 1986, The effect of context on the composition and role of orientations in second language acquisition
  29. 10.1017/S0272263101003035 · DOI
  30. 10.1075/lllt.2.12mac · DOI
  31. Miyake A., 1998, Foreign language learning: pyscholinguistic studies on training and retention, 339
  32. 10.1111/0023-8333.00094 · DOI
  33. 10.1075/sibil.17.09nag · DOI
  34. Naiman N., 1978, The good language learner
  35. 10.1111/0023-8333.00112 · DOI
  36. 10.1016/0346-251X(89)90036-5 · DOI
  37. Oxford R., 1990, Language learning strategies: what every teacher should know
  38. 10.2307/3586356 · DOI
  39. 10.1111/0023-8333.21997002 · DOI
  40. 10.1177/026765830101700405 · DOI · Paper page
  41. Robson G., 2001, How reliable and valid is the Japanese version of the strategy inventory for language learning (SILL), JALT Journal, 23, 202, 10.37546/JALTJJ23.2-2 · DOI
  42. Sasaki M., 1996, Second language proficiency, foreign language aptitude, and intelligence
  43. 10.1111/0026-7902.00107 · DOI
  44. Schumann J., 1997, Language learning monograph series
  45. Skehan P., 1990, Current trends in European second language acquisition research, 83
  46. 10.1017/S0272263100009979 · DOI
  47. Skehan P., 1998, A cognitive approach to language learning
  48. 10.1075/lllt.2.06ske · DOI · Paper page
  49. 10.1111/0026-7902.00066 · DOI
  50. 10.1037/0022-0663.87.4.638 · DOI
  51. 10.1111/0026-7902.00108 · DOI
  52. 10.1093/applin/21.2.157 · DOI
  53. 10.1075/lllt.2.04ste · DOI
  54. 10.2307/3586652 · DOI
  55. Tanaka K., 2003, Study abroad, language proficiency and learner beliefs about language learning, JALT Journal, 25, 63, 10.37546/JALTJJ25.1-3 · DOI
  56. 10.1111/0023-8333.00117 · DOI
  57. Williams M., 1999, Students developing conceptions of themselves as language learners, System, 83, 193
  58. Willing K., 1987, Learning styles and adult migrant education
  59. Witkin H., 1971, A manual for the Embedded Figures Test
  60. 10.1016/S0346-251X(99)00048-2 · DOI
  61. Arnold J., 1999, Affective language learning
  62. Benson P., 2000, Teaching and researching autonomy in language learning
  63. Dörnyei Z., 2001, Teaching and researching motivation
  64. Larsen‐Freeman D., 2001, Learner contributions to language learning, 12
  65. 10.1075/lllt.2 · DOI
  66. Skehan P., Handbook of second language acquisition
  67. Wenden A., 1991, Learner strategies for learner autonomy
  68. Williams M., 1997, Psychology for language teachers

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Metadata

Authors
Ellis, R.
Venue
The Handbook of Applied Linguistics
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2004-01
Pages
525-551
Cited by
126
References
4
Language
en

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review