The DOI matches its Crossref record; 26 of the 26 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: multi-level (and mixed-effects) models
Abstract
Much statistical analysis of psycholinguistic data is now being done with so-called mixed-effects regression models. This development was spearheaded by a few highly influential introductory articles that (i) showed how these regression models are superior to what was the previous gold standard and, perhaps even more importantly, (ii) showed how these models are used practically. Corpus linguistics can benefit from mixed-effects/multi-level models for the same reason that psycholinguistics can – because, for example, speaker-specific and lexically specific idiosyncrasies can be accounted for elegantly; but, in fact, corpus linguistics needs them even more because (i) corpus-linguistic data are observational and, thus, usually unbalanced and messy/noisy, and (ii) most widely used corpora come with a hierarchical structure that corpus linguists routinely fail to consider. Unlike nearly all overviews of mixed-effects/multi-level modelling, this paper is specifically written for corpus linguists to get more of them to start using these techniques more. After a short methodological history, I provide a non-technical introduction to mixed-effects models and then discuss in detail one example – particle placement in English – to show how mixed-effects/multi-level modelling results can be obtained and how they are far superior to those of traditional regression modelling.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information-theoretic approach.
Guthery, F. S., Burnham, K. P., & Anderson, D. R. (2003) · The Journal of Wildlife Management · doi:10.2307/3802723 · Cited by 41,495
Mixed effects models and extensions in ecology with R
Zuur, A. F., Ieno, E. N., Walker, N., Saveliev, A. A., & Smith, G. M. (2009) · Statistics for Biology and Health · doi:10.1007/978-0-387-87458-6 · Cited by 17,963
Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models
Gelman, A., & Hill, J. (2006) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511790942 · Cited by 13,597
A general and simple method for obtaining R 2 from generalized linear mixed‐effects models
Nakagawa, S., & Schielzeth, H. (2013) · Methods in Ecology and Evolution · doi:10.1111/j.2041-210x.2012.00261.x · Cited by 10,356
Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001 · Cited by 10,328
Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items
Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J., & Bates, D. M. (2008) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005 · Cited by 8,540
Crawley, M. J. (2007) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 5,431
Categorical data analysis: Away from ANOVAs (transformation or not) and towards logit mixed models
Jaeger, T. F. (2008) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.11.007 · Cited by 3,317
Analyzing Linguistic Data: A Practical Introduction to Statistics using R
Baayen, R. H. (2008) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511801686 · Cited by 3,253
Analyzing linguistic data : a practical introduction to statistics using R
Baayen, R. H. (2008) · Cited by 2,069
Cited by
Best practice guidance for linear mixed-effects models in psychological science
Meteyard, L., & Davies, R. A. I. (2020) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2020.104092 · Cited by 698
An A–Z of Applied Linguistics Research Methods
Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2016) · doi:10.1007/978-1-137-40322-3 · Cited by 156
Corpus-Assisted Discourse Studies
Gillings, M., Mautner, G., & Baker, P. (2023) · doi:10.1017/9781009168144 · Cited by 146
MEASURING LONGITUDINAL WRITING DEVELOPMENT USING INDICES OF SYNTACTIC COMPLEXITY AND SOPHISTICATION
Kyle, K., Crossley, S., & Verspoor, M. (2021) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263120000546 · Cited by 83
Wagner, T. (2017) · Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching · doi:10.14746/ssllt.2017.7.3.9 · Cited by 4
Metadata
- Authors
- Th. Gries, S.
- Venue
- Corpora
- Publisher
- Edinburgh University Press
- Published
- 2015-04
- Volume
- 10
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 95-125
- ISSN
- 1749-5032 (ISSN-L)
- 1755-1676
- OpenAlex
- W2048552402
- Cited by
- 340
- References
- 26
- FWCI
- 13.72
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.3366/cor.2015.0068
- The paper
- Th. Gries, S. (2015). The most under-used statistical method in corpus linguistics: multi-level (and mixed-effects) models. Corpora. https://doi.org/10.3366/cor.2015.0068
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.