MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3112073117 · doi:10.52598/jpll/2/2/9

Book Review: Contemporary Language Motivation Theory – 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959) by Ali H. Al-Hoorie and Peter D. MacIntyre

2020· article· en· W3112073117 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Dorota Záborská

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal for the Psychology of Language Learning · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAudience measurementHonorBlessingMilestoneRelevance (law)ClassicsSociologyPsychologyPhilosophyHistoryTheologyLawPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Whether it is a truism or a cliché, we stand on the shoulders of giants. Professor Robert Gardner is certainly one of them. The year 2019 marked 60 years since the publication of his seminal paper, Motivational Variables in Second Language Acquisition, written together with Wallace E. Lambert and published in the Canadian Journal of Psychology in 1959. The paper is widely acknowledged as the beginning of L2 motivation research, and to borrow Dörnyei’s words introducing this anthology, “[it] is not only important because it was a historical milestone and offered fertile ground in which subsequent research could grow, but also because it is still relevant” (Dörnyei, 2020, p. xxi). Having Dörnyei’s blessing, and with the caliber of contributors in this anthology, the relevance of Gardner’s legacy of research is without question. In this festschrift, editors Ali H. Al-Hoorie and Peter D. MacIntyre bring together twenty-six scholars in the fields of applied linguistics, social psychology, and sociology to honor the career and research contributions of Robert Gardner. Each contribution connects to, develops, and builds upon the ideas of Gardner and Lambert, and links them to current trends and developments related to contemporary language motivation research. Thus, this collection of papers will delight and catch the attention of a wide readership from graduate students to practitioners to established researchers alike.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.027
Threshold uncertainty score0.092

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0020.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.008
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.002
Research integrity0.0030.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0270.016

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.026
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.274 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal for the Psychology of Language LearningSame topicSecond Language Learning and TeachingFrench-language works237,207