Debating researcher labels in the field of language learning psychology: Do we really have an identity crisis?

Abstract

The COVID-19 pandemic considerably affected the research community in personal and professional ways. Many projects were delayed or even canceled entirely. Yet, in a positive sense, the
pandemic forced researchers to shift focus and examine emerging issues in real-time quickly. In response to the enforced COVID-19 gap in face-to-face conferences, the podcast series “Lost in
Citations” aimed to provide a space for open-access discourse. During a series of interviews with leading academics in the interdisciplinary field of the psychology of language learning (PLL), a
“podcast narrative” emerged regarding (a) researcher labels (e.g., applied linguist, psychologist), (b) possible implications of these labels and (c) the value of interdisciplinary research. Although there
was healthy disagreement, leading psychologists and applied linguists in the field of PLL agree that interdisciplinary research is challenging; therefore, steps need to be put in place to ensure quality. However, these steps should not limit creativity or individuals based on their degree title.

Full text

九州大学学術情報リポジトリ
Kyushu University Institutional Repository
Debating researcher labels in the field of
language learning psychology: Do we really have
an identity crisis?
Haswell, G. Christpher
九州大学大学院言語文化研究院
SHACHTER, Jonathan
http://hdl.handle.net/2324/6779676
出版情報：言語文化論究. 50, pp.53-63, 2023-03-20. Faculty of Languages and Cultures, Kyushu
University
バージョン：
権利関係：

53
Studies in Languages and Cultures, No. 50
1. Introduction
The ultimate goal of a researcher is to situate one’s viewpoints in the context of an ongoing conversation
(Harris, 2017). In the academy, the path of this ongoing conversation largely revolves around (or some
would argue explicitly follows) experts in the field. Few, however, have the opportunity to engage in spoken-
word conversations with the leaders whom we regularly cite in scholarly works. This is why Harris (2017)
emphasizes the importance of writing more precisely, nuanced, and expressively. Because we cannot liter-
ally hear a writer’s voice (and all the subtleties and context-defining moments within a speech, presenta-
tion, or conversation), it is paramount that we all write clearly.
Debating researcher labels in the field
of language learning psychology:
Do we really have an identity crisis?
Christopher G. HASWELL & Jonathan SHACHTER
Abstract:
The COVID-19 pandemic considerably affected the research community in personal and profes-
sional ways. Many projects were delayed or even canceled entirely. Yet, in a positive sense, the
pandemic forced researchers to shift focus and examine emerging issues in real-time. In response to
the enforced COVID-19 gap in face-to-face conferences, the podcast series “Lost in Citations” aimed
to provide a space for open-access discourse. During a series of interviews with leading academics in
the interdisciplinary field of the psychology of language learning (PLL), a “podcast narrative” emerged
regarding (a) researcher labels (e.g., applied linguist, psychologist), (b) possible implications of these
labels and (c) the value of interdisciplinary research. Although there was healthy disagreement,
leading psychologists and applied linguists in the field of PLL agree that interdisciplinary research is
challenging; therefore, steps need to be put in place to ensure quality. However, these steps should
not limit creativity or individuals based on their degree title.
Key Words: Narrative, Psychology, Language learning, Interprofessional communication, Group
boundaries
I’ve tried to offer a view of academic writing as a social practice, as a form of intellectual work that is
always rooted in a set of ongoing conversations and that is always looking to push such talk another step
forward.
- Joseph Harris, “Rewriting”

54
言語文化論究 50
2
The impetus of this particular paper, however, is not to offer criticisms or suggestions on academic
writing. Instead, the aim is to share an organic “podcast narrative.” The term “podcast narrative” describes
the nature in which academics can respond to each other and build upon arguments in “real-time” through
the medium of podcasting (Haswell & Shachter, 2021). This method of qualitative data collection and open-
access information sharing emerged because of conference cancellations in the era of COVID-19 (Rose et
al., 2020).
This particular paper focuses on a debate which emerged regarding (a) researcher labels (e.g., applied
linguist, psychologist), (b) the possible implications of these labels, and (c) the value of interdisciplinary
research. The scholars who offered their insights on this topic were: Dr. Peter MacIntyre (Cape Breton
University), Dr. Ali H. Al-Hoorie (Jubail English Language and Preparatory Year Institute, Royal
Commission for Jubail and Yanbu), Dr. Kim Noels (University of Alberta), Dr. Sarah Mercer (University of
Graz), and Dr. Tammy Gregersen (American University of Sharjah).
Harris (2017) argues that we should not reply to texts we cite but rather we should “forward passages
and ideas from them” (p. 37). Therefore, in that approach, we will offer observations from this podcast
narrative for your consideration. In tandem with this article, we encourage you to listen to the interviews
in their entirety, read the cited works (which Lost in Citations podcast episodes are centered upon), and
then form your own opinions and conclusions.
2. The Lost in Citations Podcast
In each interview, we learn about the writer’s background, the impetus for the chosen citation, the prepara-
tion and production of the publication, and discussion topics within the work. As conferences continued to
be canceled during the COVID pandemic, the podcast grew in popularity - possibly because academics
were lacking opportunities to connect and discuss emerging issues in the field (Haswell & Shachter, 2021).
As this paper is being submitted for publication, there have been 99 published episodes with guests repre-
senting 82 universities from 12 countries. Our podcast has been recognized as a resource for developing
knowledge in English Language Teaching (Turner, Schaefer & Lowe, 2021).
With a podcast focused on published works, listeners can put a voice to the words they have read and
glean insights from experts in real time (Shachter & Haswell, 2022). Moreover, these insights sometimes
go beyond the printed word, where listeners learn of circumstances or issues that influenced the final draft.
Another advantage of an academic podcast is that it provides a platform where experts in the field can
directly address their colleagues in an open-access format. Because a podcast is free from the constraints
of lengthy review processes and publication lags, the academy is privy to what leading researchers are
thinking about “right now.” This contrasts with formal academic responses or rebuttals, which may take
upwards of a year for a journal to publish. When publishing a formal response, perhaps viewpoints have
shifted or evolved. Considering these benefits, it is fair to argue that a series of interviews with leading
scholars in the field is an effective method to showcase emerging issues or debates. In short, we want to
draw attention to the efficacy of podcasting - both as a qualitative data collection methodology and a vehicle
for disseminating information.

55
Debating researcher labels in the field of language learning psychology 3
3. Context of selected interviews and the emergence of the researcher label debate
The author is a member of a relatively newly founded (i.e., the last decade) academic society named the
International Association of the Psychology of Language Learning (IAPPL). Along with a journal, the
organization publishes an interdisciplinary book series named the Psychology of Language Learning and
Teaching (edited by Sarah Mercer and Stephen Ryan). A book published in 2020 entitled “Contemporary
Language Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959)” sparked the forthcoming
debate about researcher labels.
Edited by Ali-Al Hoorie and Peter MacIntyre (a Ph.D. student of Gardner), the ambitious work sum-
marizes the path of language motivation (LM) since the seminal work of Gardner and Lambert (1959).
With Gardner himself contributing a chapter to the book, readers are able to trace the roots of LM research
to tangible moments in time. Contained within this book are multiple opportunities for discussion and
debate. In particular, when defining eras of research, Zoltán Dörnyei (perhaps the most cited scholar in the
field of LM) writes the following in the book’s forward:
“Gardner and his associates were first and foremost psychologists who were interested in second
language acquisition for various social reasons. I am one of a group of scholars (e.g., Crookes,
Julkunen, Oxford, Schmidt, Skehan, Ushioda and Williams) who are second language acquisition spe-
cialists (and often also language teachers), interested in psychology because they realised its signifi-
cance for understanding the life of language classrooms” (Al-Hoorie & MacIntyre, 2020, p. 32).
This comment essentially establishes a line of demarcation (i.e., psychologists versus educators versus
applied linguists) and consequently sparked a line of inquiry regarding researcher labels and possible impli-
cations (e.g., Can applied linguists adequately conduct psychological research?). We were curious how
leading applied linguists and psychologists in the field of language learning would respond to Dörnyei’s
assertions and whether debates existed regarding (a) researcher labels and (b) implications surrounding
these labels.
As mentioned, Ali-Al Hoorie and Peter MacIntyre were the editors of “Contemporary Language
Motivation Theory: 60 Years Since Gardner and Lambert (1959),” so they were sought out as the first
interviews. During the interview with MacIntyre, it was recommended that I speak with his psychologist
colleague Noels (MacIntyre and Noels had studied together during their Ph.D. candidacy in Canada).
Mercer was chosen because of (a) her work as an editor of the Psychology of Language Learning and
Teaching book series and (b) the fact that she had recently gone back and earned a Masters degree in psy-
chology. We were curious about why she returned for an additional degree after earning her Ph.D. in
applied linguistics. Gregersen was chosen because of her joint psychology of language learning research
with MacIntyre (e.g., Gregersen et al., 2014) and Mercer (e.g., Mercer & Gregersen, 2020).
Perhaps the interview which sparked the most debate was Ali-Al Hoorie - an individual with strong
opinions regarding prerequisite graduate training in psychology. He directly questions whether individuals
without advanced degrees in psychology are qualified to conduct psychological research. In fact, at the
time of his interview, he already had a paper in press entitled “The identity crisis in language motivation

56
言語文化論究 50
4
research” (Al-Hoorie et al., 2021). It is recommended that readers review that paper for further context.
4. Podcast Narrative “Researcher labels and consequent implications.”
The ‘Lost in Citations’ podcast interviews specifically covered in this paper are:
51. Dr. Peter MacIntyre, Ph.D. in Psychology
55. Dr. Ali-Al Hoorie, Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics
83. Dr. Kim Noels, Ph.D. in Psychology
99. Dr. Sarah Mercer, Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics
103. Dr. Tammy Gregersen, Ph.D. in Applied Linguistics
What follows is a description of each podcast episode, a brief biography of the guest, and segments of
each interview with relevant space for commentary and discussion. As the podcast narrative developed,
guests directly addressed their colleagues. Since it is impossible to include the transcripts of entire pod-
casts in this paper, we recommend that you listen to the interviews in full at LostInCitations.com.
Regarding data collection methodology, Mp3 audio files were transcribed using the application Otter.ai.
Interview transcripts were back-checked by listening again to the original audio file. For reference pur-
poses, we have included time stamps after quoted material (e.g., 41:03).
Dr. Peter MacIntyre, Cape Breton University (Canada) - Interview #51
Paper discussed: MacIntyre, P. D. (2018). An Overview of Language Anxiety Research and Trends in its
Development. In New Insights into Language Anxiety (pp. 11–30). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit:
Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783097722-003
Date of podcast publication: March 17, 2021
Dr. Peter MacIntyre researches multiple disciplines, including the fields of language learning anxiety,
willingness to communicate, motivation, positive psychology, and, most recently, “grit” (MacIntyre &
Khajavy, 2021). From 1989-2022, MacIntyre has been cited over 37,000 times (Google Scholar). When
asked about his reach through multiple disciplines, MacIntyre commented on the podcast, “Yeah, I’m kind
of like a rash on the computer; I just pop up everywhere” (41:52).
As mentioned, MacIntyre was a Ph.D. student under the tutelage of famed psychologist Robert
Gardner - together publishing seminal papers in the field of language learning psychology (e.g., Gardner &
MacIntyre, 1993; MacIntyre & Gardner, 1994). In the podcast interview, MacIntyre describes that his
initial interest in the psychology of speech communication (not language learning) could be traced to con-
versations with an academic advisor before deciding on his undergraduate degree program at Cape Breton
University.
“I was assigned to a professor of speech communication, and I hadn’t really heard of that discipline
before... she talked about how psychology (which is what I was interested in) related to communication,
and she was talking about public speaking anxiety, and she was talking about interpersonal relationships,
depending on communication. And she just convinced me that this was something that I had to do. And so
I signed up for my undergraduate degree with a joint major in psychology and speech communication”
(6:36).

57
Debating researcher labels in the field of language learning psychology 5
During his undergraduate studies, MacIntyre had an opportunity to work on a research project with
Professor Judy Rolls (specialist in speech communication). In the project, they were investigating whether
taking a communication course reduced speaking anxiety. “It turned out the data were compelling – that
taking a communication course reduced public speaking anxiety by quite a bit, not taking a course, there
was no change” (7:10).
MacIntyre eventually decided to pursue a Ph.D. focusing on the connection between interpersonal
relationships and speech communication performance. During his time comparing potential schools and
programs, he became aware of the researcher Robert Gardner. Interestingly, Gardner was investigating
these themes in the realm of language learning - something that MacIntyre had not previously considered.
However, once he began researching interpersonal relationships and the effects on communication in the
field of second language learning (under the guidance of Gardner), MacIntyre became invigorated with the
potential for research. One factor which particularly sparked his interest was the fact that a language
learner could travel from zero words as a raw beginner to a fluent speaker.
“With the range of communication possibilities, it just seemed like the door was wide open to inves-
tigating so many interesting things with second language. And it turned out to be even more interesting
than I imagined at the time” (8:00). In summary, MacIntyre’s initial interest in the psychology of speech
communication led him to the psychology of language learning. When considering who should conduct
psychology research in the field of language learning, perhaps Ali-Al Hoorie views the credentials of
MacIntyre as ideal.
Dr. Ali-Al Hoorie, Jubail English Language and Preparatory Year Institute, Royal Commission
for Jubail and Yanbu (Saudi Arabia) - Interview #55
Paper discussed: Al-Hoorie, A. H., & MacIntyre, P. (Eds.). (2019). Contemporary language motivation
theory: 60 years since Gardner and Lambert (1959). Multilingual Matters.
Date of podcast publication: April 14, 2021
Dr. Ali-Al Hoorie is an award-winning applied linguist from Saudi Arabia. After earning his Ph.D. in
Applied Linguists under the direction of Zoltán Dörnyei at the University of Nottingham, he has been a
prolific researcher - publishing journal articles, books, and edited collections. Among other specialties, Al
Hoorie is an expert in language motivation and dynamic systems theory. One of his main research/ publica-
tion partners has been Dr. Phil Hiver (a fellow Ph.D. student at Nottingham). Together they wrote
“Research methods for complexity theory in applied linguistics” in 2019.
When asked whether he agreed with Dörnyei’s distinction that a shift occurred where researchers
identified as applied linguists as opposed to psychologists, Al-Hoorie acknowledged that labels could
confuse. “Applied linguists applying psychology, right? Why aren’t they called applied psychologists? ... If
you look at Zoltán’s books, he has several with the word “psychology” in the title - and these are very
popular in the field. But we (applied linguists) are not psychologists. And then there is a new strand of
research in the field called “positive psychology.” But we are not psychologists. You know, I find it hard to
see how you can do research and publish your research in top journals related to positive psychology when
you are not a psychologist, right?” (12:06).
As the conversation develops, Al-Hoorie continues to lean into the demarcation line and highlights

58
言語文化論究 50
6
contradictory perceptions that may accompany researcher labels - especially within interdisciplinary orga-
nizations like IAPLL. He highlights that being labeled a psychologist like Gardner, MacIntyre, Noels, and
Mercer is important because it represents advanced training in a discipline (i.e., the earning of a Ph.D. or
Masters degree in psychology). “Some people might say, why do you care about these labels? Does it
matter whether they are linguists or psychologists? I would say, yes, it does matter because psychologists
are here to represent your training” (13:42).
As a solution, Al-Hoorie urges more collaboration across disciplines. “I’m not saying that people
should stop doing psychology work in our field, because they graduated from the linguistics department.
What I am saying is that we should do interdisciplinary research by reaching out to psychologists and col-
laborating with them” (14:36).
Dr. Kim Noels, University of Alberta (Canada) - Interview #83
Paper discussed: Noels, K. A., Lou, N. M., Lascano, D. I. V., Chaffee, K. E., Dincer, A., Zhang, Y. S. D., &
Zhang, X. (2019). Self-determination and motivated engagement in language learning. In The Palgrave
handbook of motivation for language learning (pp. 95-115). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham.
Date of podcast publication: November 3, 2021
Dr. Kim Noels is a psychologist widely known for her research into language motivation (intrinsic/
extrinsic) and self-determination theory. Actively cited by other scholars from 1991-2022 (over 18,000 at
the time of publication) (Google Scholar), Noels frequently collaborates with her Ph.D. students. Reflecting
on the process of group-writing a chapter for The Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning
(Noels et al., 2020), Noels said on the podcast, “As the supervisor to all my co-authors, I hope I didn’t use
too much of my own voice in there. But you know, we really did spend a lot of time talking through things
together on a really regular basis, perhaps more regular than most co-authors get to because we’re in the
lab together all the time every day... so ... yeah, it came together pretty nicely” (03:40).
MacIntyre suggested that we interview Noels because (a) she was a fellow psychologist and (b) she
had directly influenced his research interests when they were both Ph.D. students. Following the inter-
view with Al-Hoorie, we were interested in how she viewed her training as having a “real” background in
psychology. “I don’t know that I would say there’s a ‘real’ background in psychology; there’s certainly a
naming problem” (1:15). She clarifies the point by explaining her position regarding the term “applied
linguist”. From her perspective as a psychologist, the term “applied linguistics” is an outdated way of
thinking. “You know, people across the social sciences all have an interest in how we use and learn new
languages. It’s just fascinating. So, I don’t think that one discipline gets to own it. Even applied linguis-
tics” (2:05).
Regarding Al-Hoorie’s suggestion that applied linguistics and psychologists should conduct interdis-
ciplinary research, Noels agreed but admitted that no researcher has reached out personally to her to do
so. This was surprising considering the amount of expertise needed to conduct psychological research in
language learning settings. When asked if she feels uncomfortable reading psychological studies or attend-
ing psychological presentations conducted by scholars in other fields (i.e., defined by their degree name),
she admitted that at times she did when reading papers and seeing theoretical models. “I have had con-
cerns about how psychological theory has been represented...” (24:20). From there, though, she does

59
Debating researcher labels in the field of language learning psychology 7
pivot a bit and offers a different perspective - diverging from the skeptical lens, she says, “it’s interesting
because we borrow, we should be borrowing ideas from other disciplines... it doesn’t have to be exact
copies, we should adopt them, we build on them, we’re inspired by them, and we take them in new direc-
tions. So that’s all a good thing” (24:55).
In summary, Noels does not have an issue with non-psychologists conducting psychological research
as long as the theory is well-grounded and the researchers have a mastery of the literature on both sides.
Regarding language learning psychology, she emphasizes that it was inevitable that non-psychologists
(e.g., educators) would spearhead research projects in the classroom. “They had experience in the class-
room - something that we didn’t have at the time” (23:22).
Dr. Sarah Mercer, University of Graz (Austria) - Interview #97
Paper discussed: Mercer, S., MacIntyre, P., Gregersen, T., & Talbot, K. (2018). Positive Language
Education: Combining positive education and language education. Theory and Practice of Second Language
Acquisition, 4(2).
Date of podcast publication: March 2, 2022
Dr. Sarah Mercer is an applied linguist who recently went back and earned a Masters degree in psy-
chology. A driving force behind IAPLL, Mercer is well known for her research into positive psychology -
both from a learner and educator perspective (e.g., Mercer, 2011; Mercer & Gregersen, 2020).
When asked directly to comment on Al-Hoorie’s assertions about a possible “identity crisis” regard-
ing researchers within the field of the psychology of language learning, Mercer was quite strong in her
rebuttal. The main crux of her counter-argument is the notion of identity itself. “Interestingly enough, my
first love was self-concept - and that, obviously, touches on the field of identity. I don’t know anybody who
thinks that identity is not multi-dimensional/fluid with blurry boundaries, dynamics, it draws on different
fields. So why would your identity as a researcher be singularly defined? It makes no sense... if you look
at language learning and teaching, it is such a complex undertaking - of course, you’re going to draw on
different disciplines. And I think that’s actually very healthy” (26:42).
Mercer emphasizes that conducting psychological research in the field of language learning presents
challenges, and these challenges can deter individuals. “We must maintain quality. And that means a com-
mitment from someone working in this field to engage with two big bodies of literature, research, and
working scholarship. And I think that will possibly deter some people. And it will lead some people to do
work that’s not of sufficient quality if they haven’t engaged fully with what that means. But I have no
problem with us having this rich, diverse, dynamic, multi-interdisciplinary area of scholarship - I think it’s
a wonderful space to work. It’s exciting. It’s original. And I think it’s very, very real. So, I don’t see any
identity problem. I think that for me that statement reflects a lack of confidence to be who we are and to
say who we are clearly and confidently” (28:46).
After graduating with a Ph.D. in applied linguistics, Mercer conducted a significant amount of psycho-
logical research in the field of language learning, so we were curious why she felt the need to go back and
get a Masters degree in psychology. She conceded that various internal and external pressures pushed her
to confirm the fact that her research was solid. Indeed, her previous research had been solid - “I came out
of it feeling confident that actually what we were doing before was just fine” (31:37). Mercer also

60
言語文化論究 50
8
highlighted that certain fields (like psychology) are often defined by an understanding of what research is.
This is slightly different than the field of language learning, where a multitude of methodologies are
employed. “I’m a very passionate and engaged qualitative researcher, and I’ve been involved in mixed
methods studies... I just don’t get so excited about a pure quantitative study - it’s just a personal thing”
(32:01).
Mercer also highlights that certain labels can actually restrict researchers, which is exactly the oppo-
site of what is necessary when investigating dynamic factors within language learning. “One of the things
that I think we benefit from in IAPLL is the diversity of methodological approaches. And that leads to
richer, more varied, more diverse insights and allows us to have a more nuanced understanding. We don’t
get into this treadmill of replication, and we allow ourselves a little bit more creativity and innovation. So,
you know, I’ve realized I’m probably upsetting some people along the way here. But I think that that’s a
positive thing to have that diversity. And my experience of doing the degree in psychology, I felt that they
(psychologists) were still so constrained by this need to prove themselves as a certain type of researcher,
hard science - taking seriously certain types of methodological approaches, and so on. I felt that in some
ways, in some places, restricted creativity and an ability to think and challenge the norms” (33:06).
Like previous conversations in this podcast narrative, we returned to the topic of interdisciplinary
research. “I think there’s this insularity of disciplinary thinking... something that IAPLL does well is to
challenge that... we have communication scientists, we have psychologists, we have applied linguists, and
we have language teachers. Now you can’t get a better, more rewarding, rich combination of people than
that for our field” (34:18).
Dr. Tammy Gregersen, American University of Sharjah (Dubai) - Interview #109
Paper discussed: Gregersen, T., MacIntyre, P. & Macmillan, N. (2020). 13. Dealing with the Emotions of
Teaching Abroad: Searching for silver linings in a difficult context. In C. Gkonou, J. Dewaele & J. King
(Ed.), The Emotional Rollercoaster of Language Teaching (pp. 228-246). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit:
Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788928342-017
Date of podcast publication: May 25, 2022
Dr. Tammy Gregersen is an applied linguist, educator, and active researcher in the field of the psychol-
ogy of language learning. She has co-authored a variety of articles and book chapters with MacIntyre and
Mercer. With MacIntyre, she tracked heart rate changes in a language classroom - one of the only studies
of its kind (Gregersen et al., 2014). With a recent focus on positive psychology (e.g., MacIntyre, Gregersen
& Mercer, 2019), Gregersen has spent most of her career investigating affective factors and dynamic
changes within language learning environments. Through her research efforts, she has found that positive
psychological strategies (e.g., positive reframing) can help students and educators cope with debilitating
stress in the classroom.
When asked to respond to Al-Hoorie’s comments regarding research labels and the implications of
trained psychologists versus non-trained psychologists in the field of language learning, Gregersen coun-
tered from a position of dynamic systems theory. “You know, I love Ali, but I disagree with him vehemently
on what he is saying there. And it actually is surprising because he’s an expert in dynamics and dynamic
systems. And if anybody is going to understand dynamic systems, we’re going to understand that all kinds

61
Debating researcher labels in the field of language learning psychology 9
of things are interacting and interrelating. And we can’t put things into boxes. Because everything is
interconnected” (23:26)
Gregersen expands on Noels’ point concerning how teachers are in the classroom environment much
more than psychologists. From this perspective, Gregersen argues that teachers may be more qualified to
discern emerging psychological research issues in the classroom (regardless of a label). “Now, I would
suggest that I’m in pedagogy, I’m a teacher, and what profession in the world (next to being a psychologist)
uses more psychology? If I’m going to be an effective teacher, I need to understand the mindsets and emo-
tions and cognitive abilities of my students. Right? And so for someone to say that you can’t get into psy-
chology because you’re a linguist, or you can’t get into psychology because you’re a teacher, and they put
me into that box... I’m just so totally opposed. And it’s something I don’t understand. I don’t understand
a person (Al-Hoorie) in dynamics who understand the dynamics of life and the classroom and language
learning, which suggests that we have to, you know, stick to a box” (24:36).
Gregersen goes on to say that researchers and teachers evolve over the course of their career regard-
less of formal training. “As language teachers, as teachers in general, you know, the big idea right now is
you need to have learners who learn how to learn, right? And why do we say that? We say that because
they need to be evolving as their life morphs, right? And so, it may be that I started out as a high school
English teacher, but as my life evolves, and morphs, I’ve learned how to learn. And so the idea that I can’t
learn something new, because I don’t have a formal degree in it is really somewhat antithetical to the whole
idea of why we educate people. We educate people so that they can keep on learning and exploring new
things. You know, life would be very dull if all I could do for the rest of my life is study what I studied in the
university - that doesn’t move anything forward. Right? A degree doth not make the person” (27:05).
To bring Al-Hoorie’s “voice” to the argument, the host highlighted that Gregersen had co-wrote mul-
tiple papers with MacIntyre, so perhaps those papers do not fall within the context of the argument. When
asked how she felt if non-trained psychologists publish a paper in a psychology journal Gregersen high-
lighted the peer review system. “Well, we’re being peer-reviewed, right? In our peer review, we expect
that if we’re incorrect or we’re going in the wrong direction, we’re going to be corrected or that it wouldn’t
get published. And so we do have safeguards in the field to make sure that people are not publishing things
that they know nothing about” (28:02).
5. Conclusion
A podcast narrative and debate regarding researcher labels emerged during interviews with leading psy-
chologists and applied linguists in the psychology of language learning. Launched from Zoltán Dörnyei’s
foreword in the book “Contemporary language motivation theory : 60 years since Gardner and Lambert
(1959)” (Al-Hoorie & MacIntyre, 2020), guests discussed how they balanced the issues of rigorous schol-
arship, research labels, collaboration, and creativity.
Al-Hoorie argued that labels actually represent your training, and it may only be appropriate for
trained psychologists to conduct research in the field of the psychology of language learning. Noels con-
ceded that she had been concerned with how psychological theory or models were represented by non-
psychologists but highlighted that no one person or label “owns” the field. This was echoed by MacIntyre,

62
言語文化論究 50
10
who admitted that he entered the field of language learning because it provided a path for exciting and
seemingly endless psychological research. While all individuals in this series agreed that interdisciplinary
research is ideal, Mercer and Gregersen stressed that a label should never define/limit a researcher’s
identity or potential for investigations. Gregersen also emphasized the importance of peer review as a
safeguard.
The debate developed throughout these five podcast interviews (via the Lost in Citations podcast)
sheds light on a complicated issue. Findings from the interviews suggest that although interdisciplinary
research is ideal, barriers may dissuade individuals from collaborating with other scholars or investigating
key points in the classroom. Interdisciplinary organizations like IAPLL aim to bridge these potential gaps
between researchers by encouraging discussions, which include scholars who consider research gaps from
multiple perspectives. Hopefully, the podcast narrative outlined in this paper forwards this conversation
within the academy.
References
Al-Hoorie, A. H., & MacIntyre, P. D. (2020). Contemporary language motivation theory : 60 years since
Gardner and Lambert (1959). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
Al-Hoorie, A. H., Hiver, P., Kim, T.Y., & De Costa, P. I. (2021). The identity crisis in language motivation
research. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 40(1), 136–153.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X20964507
Gardner, R. C., & Lambert, W. E. (1959). Motivational variables in second-language acquisition. Canadian
Journal of Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie, 13(4), 266.
Gardner, R. C., & MacIntyre, P. D. (1993). On the measurement of affective variables in second language
learning. Language learning, 43(2), 157-194.
Gregersen, T., MacIntyre, P. & Macmillan, N. (2020). 13. Dealing with the Emotions of Teaching Abroad:
Searching for silver linings in a difficult context. In C. Gkonou, J. Dewaele & J. King (Ed.), The Emotional
Rollercoaster of Language Teaching (pp. 228-246). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788928342-017
Harris, J. (2017). Rewriting: how to do things with texts (Second Edition). Logan, Utah: Utah State University
Press.
Haswell, C. G., & Shachter, J. (2021). Turning a podcast into a research opportunity: The story of “Lost in
Citations”. Kyushu University Journal of Language and Literature, 46, 33-41.
Hiver, P., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2019). Research methods for complexity theory in applied linguistics. Multilingual
Matters.
Kim Noels (n.d.). In GoogleScholar.
https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=jX7ezD4AAAAJ
MacIntyre, P. D., & Gardner, R. C. (1994). The subtle effects of language anxiety on cognitive processing
in the second language. Language learning, 44(2), 283-305.
MacIntyre, P. D. (2018). An overview of language anxiety research and trends in its development. In New
Insights into Language Anxiety (pp. 11–30). Bristol, Blue Ridge Summit: Multilingual Matters.
https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783097722-003

63
Debating researcher labels in the field of language learning psychology 11
MacIntyre, P. D., Gregersen, T., & Mercer, S. (2019). Setting an agenda for positive psychology in SLA:
Theory, practice, and research. The Modern Language Journal, 103(1), 262-274.
MacIntyre, P., & Khajavy, G. H. (2021). Grit in second language learning and teaching: Introduction to the
special issue. Journal for the Psychology of Language Learning, 3(2), 1-6.
Mercer, S. (2011). Towards an understanding of language learner self-concept (Vol. 12). Springer.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9569-5
Mercer, S., MacIntyre, P., Gregersen, T., & Talbot, K. (2018). Positive language education: Combining posi-
tive education and language education. Theory and Practice of Second Language Acquisition, 4(2).
Mercer, S., & Gregersen, T. (2020). Teacher wellbeing. Oxford University Press.
Noels, K. A., Lou, N. M., Vargas Lascano, D. I., Chaffee, K. E., Dincer, A., Zhang,
Y. S. D., & Zhang, X. (2020). Self-determination and motivated engagement in language learning. In The
Palgrave Handbook of Motivation for Language Learning (pp. 95–115). Cham: Springer International
Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-28380-3_5
Richards, J. C., & Schmidt, R. W. (2013). Longman dictionary of language teaching and applied linguistics.
Routledge.
Rose, C., Mott, S., Alvarez, A. A., & Lin, M. (2020). Physically distant, educationally connected: interactive
conferencing in the era of COVID-19. Medical education, 54(8), 758-759.
Shachter, J. (Host) (March 17, 2021) Dr. Peter MacIntyre [Audio Podcast] Podbean.
https://lostinthecitations.podbean.com/e/citation-53-macintyre-pd2017anoverviewof-language-
anxietyresearch-and-trendsin-its-developmentnew-insights-into-language-anxietytheory-
research-an/
Shachter, J. (Host) (April 14, 2021) Dr. Ali H. Al-Hoorie [Audio Podcast] Podbean.
https://lostinthecitations.podbean.com/e/citation-51-al-hoorie-a-h-macintyre-p-eds-2019-contemporary-
language-motivation-theory-60-years-since-gardner-and-lambert-1959-multilingual-matters/
Shachter, J. (Host) (November 3, 2021) Dr. Kim Noels [Audio Podcast] Podbean.
https://lostinthecitations.podbean.com/e/83/
Shachter, J. (Host) (March 2, 2022) Dr. Sarah Mercer [Audio Podcast] Podbean.
https://lostinthecitations.podbean.com/e/97/
Shachter, J. (Host) (April 27, 2022) Dr. Tammy Gregersen [Audio Podcast] Podbean.
https://lostinthecitations.podbean.com/e/103/
Shachter, J., & Haswell, C. G. (2022). Exploring ways of accommodating silent Japanese language learners
in the classroom: Insights from scholars in the field. Journal of Silence Studies in Education, 1(2),
70–81. https://doi.org/10.31763/jsse.v1i2.12
Turner, M. W., Schaefer, M. Y., & Lowe, R. J. (2021). Teacher development through podcast engagement.
In P. Clements, R. Derrah, & P. Ferguson (Eds.), Communities of teachers & learners. JALT.
https://doi.org/10.37546/JALTPCP2020-07