The DOI matches its Crossref record.
9. Meta-analysis, human cognition, and language learning
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
The same trend applies to potential moderators, including age, gender, context, and target language.
“The same applies to potential moderators, including age, gender, context, and target language (see also Ellis, 2006).”
From The L2 motivational self system: A meta-analysis (2018) · cites this paper as Ellis, 2006
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The L2 motivational self system: A meta-analysis
Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2018) · Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.14746/ssllt.2018.8.4.2 · Cited by 351
Meta-analysis in Second Language Research: Choices and Challenges
Oswald, F. L., & Plonsky, L. (2010) · Annual Review of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1017/s0267190510000115 · Cited by 237
Metadata
- Authors
- Ellis, N. C.
- Corresponding author
- Ellis, Nick C.
- ORCID
- Ellis, Nick C.
- Venue
- Language Learning & Language Teaching
- Publisher
- John Benjamins Publishing Company
- Published
- 2006-05-09
- Pages
- 301-322
- ISSN
- 1569-9471 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2503733284
- Cited by
- 36
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2025: 16 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 2 · 2012: 1
- FWCI
- 5.23
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language learning and language teaching (publishedVersion)
- Deep Blue (University of Michigan) (submittedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
- Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Statistics, Probability and Uncertainty › Meta-analysis and systematic reviews
- Keywords
- meta-analysis, human cognition, language learning
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
