The York Research Database

TY - JOUR

T1 - A Methodological Synthesis of Self-Paced Reading in Second Language Research

T2 - Methodological synthesis of SPR tests

AU - Marsden, Emma Josephine

AU - Thompson, Sophie

AU - Plonsky, Luke

N1 - © Cambridge University Press 2018. This is an author-produced version of the published paper. Uploaded in accordance with the publisher’s self-archiving policy. Further copying may not be permitted; contact the publisher for details

PY - 2018/9/1

Y1 - 2018/9/1

N2 - Self-paced reading tests (SPRs) are being increasingly adopted by second language (L2) researchers. Using SPR with L2 populations presents specific challenges and its use is still evolving in L2 research (compared to its longer history in L1 research). Although the topic of several narrative overviews (Keating & Jegerski, 2015; Roberts, 2016), we do not have a comprehensive picture of its usage in L2 research. Building on the growing body of systematic reviews of research practices in applied linguistics (e.g., Liu & Brown, 2015; Plonsky, 2013), we report a methodological synthesis of the rationales, study contexts, and methodological decision-making in L2 SPR research. Our comprehensive search yielded 74 SPRs used in L2 research. Each instrument was coded along 121 parameters including: reported rationales and study characteristics, indicating the scope and nature of L2 SPR research agendas; design and analysis features and reporting practices, determining instrument validity and reliability; and materials transparency, affecting reproducibility and systematicity of agendas. Our findings indicate an urgent need to standardize the use and reporting of this technique, requiring empirical investigation to inform methodological decision-making. We also identify several areas (e.g., study design, sample demographics, instrument construction, data analysis and transparency) where SPR research could be improved to enrich our understanding of L2 processing, reading and learning.

AB - Self-paced reading tests (SPRs) are being increasingly adopted by second language (L2) researchers. Using SPR with L2 populations presents specific challenges and its use is still evolving in L2 research (compared to its longer history in L1 research). Although the topic of several narrative overviews (Keating & Jegerski, 2015; Roberts, 2016), we do not have a comprehensive picture of its usage in L2 research. Building on the growing body of systematic reviews of research practices in applied linguistics (e.g., Liu & Brown, 2015; Plonsky, 2013), we report a methodological synthesis of the rationales, study contexts, and methodological decision-making in L2 SPR research. Our comprehensive search yielded 74 SPRs used in L2 research. Each instrument was coded along 121 parameters including: reported rationales and study characteristics, indicating the scope and nature of L2 SPR research agendas; design and analysis features and reporting practices, determining instrument validity and reliability; and materials transparency, affecting reproducibility and systematicity of agendas. Our findings indicate an urgent need to standardize the use and reporting of this technique, requiring empirical investigation to inform methodological decision-making. We also identify several areas (e.g., study design, sample demographics, instrument construction, data analysis and transparency) where SPR research could be improved to enrich our understanding of L2 processing, reading and learning.

U2 - 10.1017/S0142716418000036

DO - 10.1017/S0142716418000036

M3 - Article

VL - 39

SP - 861

EP - 904

JO - Applied Psycholinguistics

JF - Applied Psycholinguistics

SN - 1469-1817

IS - 5

ER -