MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4387568360 · doi:10.1057/s41599-023-02109-8

Bibliometric analysis of willingness to communicate in the English as a second language (ESL) context

2023· article· en· W4387568360 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueHumanities and Social Sciences Communications · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicSecond Language Learning and Teaching
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaContext (archaeology)Willingness to communicateCitationBeijingThematic analysisPolitical scienceLibrary scienceRegional scienceSocial scienceGeographyPsychologySociologyQualitative researchComputer scienceSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Willingness to communicate (WTC) is an individual’s predisposition to communicate with a person or persons at a specific time. Over the past century, there has been a dramatic increase in WTC research. This study aims to offer an overview of the existing literature regarding WTC from 1900 to 2022 and provide a bibliometric and visual analysis of the research status as well as the development trend of this research field. A total of 428 journal articles were retrieved for the purpose of conducting bibliometric research. The data for this study were collected from the Web of Science (WOS). The results established the development status of the field of WTC, the annual scientific production and growth rate, the thematic evolution and trend topic, co-citation, and coupling between authors, sources, and countries. The bibliometric analysis showed that: (1) In the past decades, research in WTC has continued to soar and annual publications can be divided into three stages, which are an initial stage, a slow development stage, and a rapid expansion stage. It has been discussed to a wider extent mainly within the fields of education and linguistics; (2) of the 38 countries that the articles were exported from, the United States topped the list with the most publications, and Canada received the most citations. China has the most inter-country collaboration compared to other countries, which is at the center of international cooperation. China’s main cooperation countries were Iran, Japan, Canada, and Australia. The top author in the WTC field with the most production and impact is MacIntyre, PD, while System was the most popular journal. (3) By means of keyword analysis, “second language” was the most frequent keyword, followed by “model” and then “attitude”. Based on the results of the thematic evolution analysis, the research themes for 2021 to 2022 are “model”, “competence”, “Chinese”, “abroad”, “teachers”. The findings may be beneficial to L2 teachers and learners better to understand the role of WTC in language study. Researchers in this field might find the study useful for finding new research directions, relevant sources, and opportunities for collaboration.

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.

Direct model labels (unvalidated)

Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.

Model armCategoriesStudy designConfidence
gemmaBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Not applicablelow
gptBibliometrics
Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical
About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no
Other designhigh
models splitAgreement compares identical category sets and study designs across arms.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.264
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0100.018
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.147
GPT teacher head0.344
Teacher spread0.197 · 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