Keywords
language testing
language assessment
citation analysis
co-citation analysis
keyword analysis
How to Cite
Number of views: 240
Number of downloads: 46
Abstract
The current bibliometric study employed citation analysis and keyword analysis to perform a review of language assessment and testing. Based on citation counts and keywords, this study identified the recent trends/changes and the most influential regions, institutions, scholars, and publications in the field. In addition, the intellectual structures of the field reviewed by the network maps of the most influential documents and scholars showed how these eminent documents and authors were related to each other. It was found that the field experienced significant changes with the emergence of new scholars, research themes, and topics. This study is also a tribute to hundreds of scholarly documents in the field, which keep the field moving forward.
References
Alderson, J. C. (1996). Do corpora have a role in language assessment? In J. Thomas & M. Short (Eds.), Using corpora for language research: Stud-ies in the honor of Geoffrey Leech (pp. 248-259). Longman.
Alderson, J. C. (2005). Diagnosing foreign language proficiency: The inter-face between learning and assessment. Continuum.
Alderson, J. C., & Kremmel, B. (2013). Re-examining the content validation of a grammar test: The (im)possibility of distinguishing vocabulary and structural knowledge. Language Testing, 30(4), 535-556. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532213489568
Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1993). Does washback exist? Applied Linguistics, 14(2), 115-129. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/14.2.115
Alderson, J. C., & Wall, D. (1996) (Eds.). Language Testing, 13(3) [Special issue]. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229601300304
Anthony, L. (2018). AntConc (Version 3.5.6) [Computer Software]. Waseda University. http://www.laurenceanthony.net/software
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F. (2000). Modern language testing at the turn of the century: Assuring that what we count counts. Language Testing, 17(1), 1-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026553220001700101
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (1996). Language testing in practice. Oxford University Press.
Bachman, L. F., & Palmer, A. S. (2010). Language assessment in practice: Developing language assessments and justifying their use in the real world. Oxford University Press.
Batty, A. O. (2015). A comparison of video-and audio-mediated listening tests with many-facet Rasch modeling and differential distractor functioning. Language Testing, 32(1), 3-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214531254
Benson, P., Chik, A., Gao, X., Huang, J., & Wang, W. (2009). Qualitative research in language teaching and learning journals, 1997-2006. Modern Language Journal, 93(1), 79-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2009.00829.x
Berger, A. (2019). Specifying progression in academic speaking: A keyword analysis of CEFR-based proficiency descriptors. Language Assessment Quarterly, 17(1), 85-99. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1689981
Brown, A. (2003). Interviewer variation and the co-construction of speaking proficiency. Language Testing, 20, 1-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532203lt242oa
Brown, H. D. (2000). Principles of language learning and teaching (Vol. 4). Longman.
Buck, G. (2001). Assessing listening. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732959
Callon, M., Courtial, J. P., Turner, W. A., & Bauin, S. (1983). From translations to problematic networks: An introduction to co-word analysis. Information, 22(2), 191-235. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/053901883022002003
Can Daşkın, N., & Hatipoğlu, Ç. (2019). Reference to a past learning event as a practice of informal formative assessment in L2 classroom interaction. Language Testing, 36(4), 527-551. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532219857066
Carroll, J. B. (1961). Fundamental considerations in testing of English language proficiency of foreign students. In H. B. Allen & R. N. Campbell (Eds.), Teaching English as a second language: A book of readings (pp. 313-321). McGraw-Hill.
Chalhoub-Deville, M. (2003). Second language interaction: Current perspectives and future trends. Language Testing, 20(4), 369-383. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532203lt264oa
Chang, Y. W., Huang, M. H., & Lin, C. W. (2015). Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 105, 2071-2087. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1762-8
Chapelle, C. A., & Douglas, D. (2006). Assessing language through computer technology. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733116
Chen, J., White, S., McCloskey, M., Soroui, J., & Chun, Y. (2011). Effects of computer versus paper administration of an adult functional writing assessment. Assessing Writing, 16(1), 49-71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2010.11.001
Chen, M. L. (2023). SLA as an interdiscipline: A bibliometric study. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 843-882. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40218
Cheng, L., & Curtis, A. (2004). Washback or backwash: A review of the impact of testing on teaching and learning. In L. Cheng & Y. Watanabe (Eds.), Washback in language testing (pp. 25-40). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781410609731-9
Chiu, W. T., & Ho, Y. S. (2007). Bibliometric analysis of tsunami research. Scientometrics, 73(1), 3-17. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-005-1523-1
Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the social sciences. Erlbaum.
Council of Europe. (2001). Common European framework of reference for languages: Learning, teaching, assessment. Cambridge University Press.
Courtial, J. (1994). A coword analysis of scientometrics. Scientometrics, 31(3), 251-260. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02016875
Crossley, S. A., Salsbury, T., McNamara, D. S., & Jarvis, S. (2011). Predicting lexical proficiency in language learner texts using computational indices. Language Testing, 28(4), 561-580. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532210378031
Cushing, S. T. (2017). Corpus linguistics in language testing research. Language Testing, 34(4), 441-449. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217713044
de Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the science citation index to cybermetrics. Scarecrow Press.
de Bot, K. (2015). A history of applied linguistics: From 1980 to the present. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315743769
de Groote, S. L., & Raszewski, R. (2012). Coverage of Google Scholar, Scopus, and Web of Science: A case study of the h-index in nursing. Nursing Outlook, 60(6), 391-400. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.outlook.2012.04.007
Denies, K., & Janssen, R. (2016). Country and gender differences in the functioning of CEFR-based can-do statements as a tool for self-assessing English proficiency. Language Assessment Quarterly, 13(3), 251-276. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1212055
Deygers, B., Zeidler, B., Vilcu, D., & Carlsen, C. H. (2018). One framework to unite them all? Use of the CEFR in European university entrance policies. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 3-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2016.1261350
Farhady, H. (2018). History of language testing and assessment. In J. I. Liontas (Ed.), The TESOL encyclopedia of English language teaching (pp. 1-7). John Wiley & Sons. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118784235.eelt0343
Fulcher, G. (2003). Testing second language speaking. Pearson Longman.
Fulcher, G. (2004). Deluded by artifices? The Common European Framework and harmonization. Language Assessment Quarterly, 1(4), 253-266. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1207/s15434311laq0104_4
Garfield, E. (1955). Citation indexes for science: A new dimension in documentation through association of ideas. Science, 122(3159), 108-111. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.122.3159.108
Graesser, A. C., McNamara, D. S., Louwerse, M. M., & Cai, Z. (2004). Coh-Metrix: Analysis of text on cohesion and language. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(2), 193-202. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195564
Green, A. (2018). Linking tests of English for academic purposes to the CEFR: The score user’s perspective. Language Assessment Quarterly, 15(1), 59-74. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1350685
Holden, G., Rosenberg, G., & Barker, K. (2005). Tracing thought through time and space: A selective review of bibliometrics in social work. In G. Holden, G. Rosenberg, & K. Barker (Eds.). Bibliometrics in social work (pp.1-34). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1300/J010v41n03_01
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. K. (2021a). A bibliometric study of EAP research: Who is doing what, where and when? Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 49, Article 100929. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100929
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. K. (2021b). Delivering relevance: The emergence of ESP as a discipline. English for Specific Purposes, 64, 13-25. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2021.06.002
Hyland, K., & Jiang, F. (2023). Interaction in written texts: A bibliometric study of published research. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 903-924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40220
Jarvis, S. (2017). Grounding lexical diversity in human judgments. Language Testing, 34(4), 537-553. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217710632
Kane, M. T. (1992). An argument-based approach to validity. Psychological Bulletin, 112(3), 527-535. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1037//0033-2909.112.3.527
Kane, M. T. (2006). Validation. In R. L. Brennan (Eds.), Educational meas-urement (4th ed., pp. 17-64). American Council on Education/Praeger.
LaFlair, G. T., & Staples, S. (2017). Using corpus linguistics to examine the extrapolation inference in the validity argument for a high-stakes speaking assessment. Language Testing, 34(4), 451-475. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217713951
Lado, R. (1961). Language testing: The construction and use of foreign language tests: A teacher’s book. McGraw-Hill.
Lantolf, J. P., & Poehner, M. E. (2014). Sociocultural theory and the pedagogical imperative in L2 education: Vygotskian praxis and the research/practice divide. Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203813850
Lantolf, J. P., & Thorne, S. L. (2006). Sociocultural theory and the genesis of second language development. Oxford University Press.
Law, J., & Whittaker, J. (1992). Mapping acidification research: A test of the co-word method. Scientometrics, 23(3), 417-461. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02029807
Lazaraton, A. (2002). A qualitative approach to the validation of oral language tests. Cambridge University Press.
Lei, L., Deng, Y., & Liu, D. (2023). Research on the learning/teaching of L2 listening: A bibliometric review and its implications. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 781-810. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40216
Lei, L., & Liao, S. (2017). Publications in linguistics journals from Mainland China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, and Macau (2003-2012): A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 24(1), 54-64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2016.1260274
Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019a). Research trends in Applied Linguistics from 2005 to 2016: A bibliometric analysis and its implications. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 540-561. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy003
Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019b). The research trends and contributions of System’s publications over the past four decades (1973-2017): A bibliometric analysis. System, 80, 1-13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.10.003
Little, D. (2007). The Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Perspectives on the making of supranational language education policy. Modern Language Journal, 91(4), 645-655. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2007.00627_2.x
Lu, X. (2010). Automatic analysis of syntactic complexity in second language writing. International Journal of Corpus Linguistics, 15(4), 474-496. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/ijcl.15.4.02lu
Lu, X. (2011). A corpus‐based evaluation of syntactic complexity measures as indices of college‐level ESL writers’ language development. TESOL Quarterly, 45(1), 36-62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5054/tq.2011.240859
Lu, X., & Ai, H. (2015). Syntactic complexity in college-level English writing: Differences among writers with diverse L1 backgrounds. Journal of Second Language Writing, 29, 16-27. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.06.003
McNamara, T. F. (1996). Measuring second language performance. Addison Wesley Longman.
McNamara, T. (2004). Language testing. In A. Davies & C. Elder (Eds.), The handbook of applied linguistics (pp. 763-783). Blackwell. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470757000.ch31
Meara, P. (2012). The bibliometrics of vocabulary acquisition: An exploratory study. RELC Journal, 43(1), 7-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0033688212439339
Meara, P. (2023). The Routledge handbook of vocabulary studies: A study in micro-bibliometrics. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 883-902. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40219
Messick, S. (1989). Validity. In R. L. Linn (Ed.), Educational measurement (pp. 13-103). Macmillan/American Council on Education.
Messick, S. (1996). Validity and washback in language testing. Language Testing, 13(3), 241-256. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/026553229601300302
Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139524759
Pan, M., & Qian, D. D. (2017). Embedding corpora into the content validation of the grammar test of the National Matriculation English Test (NMET) in China. Language Assessment Quarterly, 14(2), 120-139. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2017.1303703
Park, K. (2014). Corpora and language assessment: The state of the art. Language Assessment Quarterly, 11(1), 27-44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2013.872647
Poehner, M. E., Zhang, J., & Lu, X. (2015). Computerized dynamic assessment (C-DA): Diagnosing L2 development according to learner responsiveness to mediation. Language Testing, 32(3), 337-357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532214560390
Purpura, J. E. (2004) Assessing grammar. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511733086
Rayson, P., & Garside, R. (2000). Comparing corpora using frequency profiling. In Proceedings of the workshop on comparing corpora (pp. 1-6). Association for Computational Linguistics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3115/1117729.1117730
Read, J. (2000). Assessing vocabulary. Cambridge University Press. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511732942
Riazi, A. M., Ghanbar, H., Marefat, F., & Fazel, I. (2023). Review and analysis of empirical articles published in TESOL Quarterly over its lifespan. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 811-841. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40217
Roemer, R. C., & Borchardt, R. (2015). Meaningful metrics: A 21st-century librarian’s guide to bibliometrics, altmetrics, and research impact. American Library Association.
Römer, U. (2017). Language assessment and the inseparability of lexis and grammar: Focus on the construct of speaking. Language Testing, 34(4), 477-492. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217711431
Segbers, J., & Schroeder, S. (2017). How many words do children know? A corpus-based estimation of children’s total vocabulary size. Language Testing, 34(3), 297-320. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532216641152
Shohamy, E. (2001). The power of tests: A critical perspective of the uses of language tests. Longman.
Skehan, P. (2009). Modelling second language performance: Integrating complexity, accuracy, fluency, and lexis. Applied Linguistics, 30(4), 510-532. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amp047
Small, H. (1973). Co‐citation in the scientific literature: A new measure of the relationship between two documents. Journal of the Association for Information Science and Technology, 24(4), 265-269. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asi.4630240406
Spolsky, B. (1981). Some ethical questions about language testing. In C. Klein-Braley & D. K. Stevenson (Eds.), Practice and problems in language testing (pp. 5-30). Peter Lang.
Spolsky, B. (1995). Measured words: The development of objective language testing. Oxford University Press.
Spolsky, B. (2017). History of language testing. In E. Shohamy, I. G. Or, & S. May. (Eds.), Language testing and assessment (pp. 375-384). DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-02261-1_32
Swales, J. (1986). Citation analysis and discourse analysis. Applied Linguistics, 7(1), 39-56. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/7.1.39
Wagner, E. (2021). Assessing listening. In G. Fulcher & L. Harding (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of language testing (pp. 223-235). Routledge. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003220756-18
Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2013). A smart local moving algorithm for large-scale modularity-based community detection. European Physical Journal B, 86, Article 471. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2013-40829-0
Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2017). VOSviewer manual. Online retrieved from http://www.vosviewer.com/documentation/Manual_VOSviewer_1.6.6.pdf
Waltman, L., Van Eck, N. J., & Noyons, E. C. M. (2010). A unified approach to mapping and clustering of bibliometric networks. Journal of Informetrics, 4(4), 629-635. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2010.07.002
Wang L., & Zhang L. J. (2019). Peter Skehan’s influence in research on task difficulty in second language learners’ acquisition of oral and written language. In E. Wen & W. Ahmadian (Eds.), Researching L2 task performance and pedagogy: In honor of Peter Skehan (pp. 183-198). John Benjamins. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1075/tblt.13.09wan
White, H. D. (2004). Citation analysis and discourse analysis revisited. Applied Linguistics, 25(1), 89-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/25.1.89
Wright, B. D. (1977). Solving measurement problems with the Rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14(2), 97-116. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1977.tb00031.x
Wilson, A. (2013). Embracing Bayes factors for key item analysis in corpus linguistics. In M. Bieswanger & A. Koll-Stobbe (Eds.), New approaches to the study of linguistic variability (pp. 3-11). Peter Lang.
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Harvard University Press.
Xi, X. (2017). What does corpus linguistics have to offer to language as-sessment? Language Testing, 34(4), 565-577. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0265532217720956
Xie, Q. (2019). Diagnosing linguistic problems in English academic writing of university students: An item bank approach. Language Assessment Quarterly. 17(2), 183-203. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/15434303.2019.1691214
Xu, Y., Zhuang, J., Blair, B., Kim, A., Li, F., Thorson Hernández, R., & Plonsky, L. (2023). Modeling quality and prestige in applied linguistics journals: A bibliometric and synthetic analysis. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 755-779. DOI: https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40215
Zhang, X. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of second language acquisition between 1997 and 2018. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 199-222. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000573
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Xian Zhang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
1.1 The Author hereby warrants that he/she is the owner of all the copyright and other intellectual property rights in the Work and that, within the scope of the present Agreement, the paper does not infringe the legal rights of another person. The owner of the copyright work also warrants that he/she is the sole and original creator thereof and that is not bound by any legal constraints in regard to the use or sale of the work.
1.2. The Publisher warrants that is the owner of the PRESSto platform for open access journals, hereinafter referred to as the PRESSto Platform.
2. The Author grants the Publisher non-exclusive and free of charge license to unlimited use worldwide over an unspecified period of time in the following areas of exploitation:
2.1. production of multiple copies of the Work produced according to the specific application of a given technology, including printing, reproduction of graphics through mechanical or electrical means (reprography) and digital technology;
2.2. marketing authorisation, loan or lease of the original or copies thereof;
2.3. public performance, public performance in the broadcast, video screening, media enhancements as well as broadcasting and rebroadcasting, made available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them;
2.4. inclusion of the Work into a collective work (i.e. with a number of contributions);
2.5. inclusion of the Work in the electronic version to be offered on an electronic platform, or any other conceivable introduction of the Work in its electronic version to the Internet;
2.6. dissemination of electronic versions of the Work in its electronic version online, in a collective work or independently;
2.7. making the Work in the electronic version available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, in particular by making it accessible via the Internet, Intranet, Extranet;
2.8. making the Work available according to appropriate license pattern Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) as well as another language version of this license or any later version published by Creative Commons.
3. The Author grants the Publisher permission to reproduce a single copy (print or download) and royalty-free use and disposal of rights to compilations of the Work and these compilations.
4. The Author grants the Publisher permission to send metadata files related to the Work, including to commercial and non-commercial journal-indexing databases.
5. The Author represents that, on the basis of the license granted in the present Agreement, the Publisher is entitled and obliged to:
5.1. allow third parties to obtain further licenses (sublicenses) to the Work and to other materials, including derivatives thereof or compilations made, based on or including the Work, whereas the provisions of such sub-licenses will be the same as with the Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) Creative Commons sub-license or another language version of this license, or any later version of this license published by Creative Commons;
5.2. make the Work available to the public in such a way that members of the public may access the Work from a place and at a time individually chosen by them, without any technological constraints;
5.3. appropriately inform members of the public to whom the Work is to be made available about sublicenses in such a way as to ensure that all parties are properly informed (appropriate informing messages).
6. Because of the royalty-free provision of services of the Author (resulting from the scope of obligations stipulated in the present Agreement), the Author shall not be entitled to any author’s fee due and payable on the part of the Publisher (no fee or royalty is payable by the Publisher to the Author).
7.1. In the case of third party claims or actions for indemnity against the Publisher owing to any infractions related to any form of infringement of intellectual property rights protection, including copyright infringements, the Author is obliged to take all possible measures necessary to protect against these claims and, when as a result of legal action, the Publisher, or any third party licensed by the Publisher to use the Work, will have to abandon using the Work in its entirety or in part or, following a court ruling in a legal challenge, to pay damages to a third party, whatever the legal basis
7.2. The Author will immediately inform the Publisher about any damage claims related to intellectual property infringements, including the author’s proprietary rights pertaining to a copyrighted work, filed against the Author. of liability, the Author is obliged to redress the damage resulting from claims made by third party, including costs and expenditures incurred in the process.
7.3. To all matters not settled herein provisions of the Polish Civil Code and the Polish Copyright and Related Rights Act shall apply.