MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404649561 · doi:10.5430/jct.v13n5p431

A Bibliometric Study of Mobile-Assisted Language Learning from 2013 to 2023: Research Themes and Trends

2024· article· en· W4404649561 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Kun Dou, Huzaina Abdul Halim, Mohd Rashid Mohd Saad

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Curriculum and Teaching · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMobile Learning in Education
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScience Citation IndexLanguage acquisitionCitationComputer scienceForeign languageSocial Sciences Citation IndexFocus (optics)PsychologyMathematics educationWorld Wide Web

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The widespread use of mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) in learning and teaching foreign languages has attracted significant interest. Following the substantial impact of COVID-19 on language education, the focus on MALL among researchers has increased to a new level. This paper reviewed the MALL-related Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) articles from 2013 to 2023, sourced from the Web of Science (WOS). Out of 535 identified articles, 241 were analyzed systematically to generate knowledge maps using CiteSpace. Based on the bibliometric study, this research identified and discussed the popular themes and research trends in MALL. Three major themes emerged through keyword co-occurrence analysis: 1) a primary focus on the English language; 2) technology integration in language learning; and 3) a learner-centered focus. The results also revealed four research trends: 1) development and application of mobile learning technologies; 2) in-depth study of language acquisition and skills development; 3) innovative research on learner characteristics and teaching methods; and 4) a shift in research methods. This research contributes to the existing literature by consolidating current knowledge and offering guidance for future investigations or developments in MALL.

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 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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesBibliometrics
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.905
Threshold uncertainty score0.995

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0170.011
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.035
GPT teacher head0.380
Teacher spread0.345 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Curriculum and TeachingSame topicMobile Learning in EducationFrench-language works237,207