Content uploaded by Ali H. Al-Hoorie
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Ali H. Al-Hoorie on Dec 08, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Content uploaded by Shaofeng Li
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Shaofeng Li on Jul 20, 2023
Content may be subject to copyright.
RESEARCH IN PROGRESS
Methodological innovation in applied linguistics
research: Perspectives, strategies, and trends
Shaofeng Li1*, Matthew Prior2, Shondel Nero3, Phil Hiver1, Ali H. Al-Hoorie4, Akira Murakami5,
Li Wei6and Lourdes Ortega7
1
Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA,
2
Arizona State University, Tempe, USA,
3
New York University, New York, USA,
4
Royal Commission for Jubail, Jubail, Saudi Arabia,
5
University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK,
6
Institute of Education,
University College London, London, UK and
7
Georgetown University, Washington, DC, USA
*Corresponding author. Email: sli9@fsu.edu
(Received 14 May 2023; accepted 14 May 2023)
1. Introduction
This invited colloquium, organized by Shaofeng Li (Florida State University, USA) and Matthew
T. Prior (Arizona State University, USA), took place on 20 March 2023, at the annual meeting of
the American Association of Applied Linguistics (AAAL) in Portland, Oregon, USA. The colloquium
consisted of an introduction to the session, four paper presentations, and comments by a discussant,
followed by audience participation. The aim of the colloquium was to promote innovation in applied
linguistics (AL) research, enhance methodological rigor and accountability, and generate new insights
for practice and theory building. With the perspective that innovation in research takes various forms,
the colloquium sought to provide a platform to discuss and understand different configurations of
innovation across diverse research areas, paradigms, methodologies, methods, and approaches. The
colloquium is the first academic venue that brings the topic of methodological innovation to the
fore in the field of AL.
2. Papers
2.1 Methodological innovations in applied linguistics: A framework and an exploratory study
In the first talk, Shaofeng Li (Florida State University) framed the colloquium in relation to four char-
acteristics of methodological innovation. First, innovation represents ORIGINALITY in that methodo-
logical innovations enable researchers to carry out research that generates new evidence for
knowledge building. Second, innovation leads to BETTER QUALITY research by overcoming existing
limitations and obtaining more robust evidence. Third, research on innovation is instructive by pro-
viding valuable insights into best practices for conducting, evaluating, identifying, and benefitting
from innovative research, thereby increasing the METHODOLOGICAL LITERACY of the field. Fourth, innov-
ation embodies a particular SPIRIT OR MINDSET. An innovative researcher is therefore many things, not
least of all well-informed, open-minded, critical, progressive, adaptable, reflective, and ethical.
Li then reported the preliminary findings of his open-ended survey asking researchers across the
field (39 responded) to define (1) what constitutes methodological innovation in AL and (2) what
methodological innovations have occurred in AL. Three major themes were identified in response
to the first research question: nature of innovation, form of innovation, and aspects of research for
innovation. Concerning the nature of innovation, respondents asserted innovative methods must be
NOVEL, demonstrably IMPROVED, and VALID (i.e., quality cannot be compromised). Forms of innovation
refer to ways innovation may occur, including creating a new method, adapting an existing method,
© The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press. This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution licence (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted re-use, distribution and reproduction,
provided the original article is properly cited.
Language Teaching (2023), 56, 551–556
doi:10.1017/S026144482300023X
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X Published online by Cambridge University Press
adopting a new epistemology/theory/approach, and combining multiple methods. Aspects of research
that can be innovated include research questions, research design, data collection, data analysis, and
meta-research (i.e., research on research), including study quality, ethics, open science, and
dissemination.
To answer the second research question, Li presented recent methodological innovations identified
by the respondents. One recurrent form of innovation is method combining, such as combining data
collection methods, types of data analysis, theoretical approaches, quantitative and qualitative methods
(i.e., mixed methods), and different variables. Li highlighted two frequently mentioned innovative
methods for data collection. The first is eye-tracking, which has been used to capture second language
(L2) learners’cognitive processes or triangulate with data collected via other techniques, such as
stimulated recall and keystroke logging. The second is technology, which falls into five categories help-
ing researchers conduct remote data collection, enhance authenticity, capture invisible processes,
facilitate learning and teaching, and collect data in online platforms. Other innovative data collection
methods included idiodynamic methods, interdisciplinary methods, longitudinal research, multi-site
research, Q-methodology, and corpus approaches. Regarding data analysis, two recurring themes
were statistical sophistication and conversation analysis, which has been applied to examine new
topics, combined with other methods, and modified to generate new variants. Respondents also
referred to multimodal analysis, social network analysis, and natural language processing as innovative
methods for data analysis. Recent topics and trends included “EDID”(equity, diversity, inclusion, and
decolonization), individual difference factors, translanguaging, complexity perspectives, usage-based
models, and research ethics. Finally, two prominent genres of meta-research emerged from the parti-
cipants’responses: research synthesis (i.e., meta-analysis, systematic narrative review, and bibliometric
studies) and open science (e.g., open data, open methods, open resources, and open evidence).
Li concluded his talk by identifying six mega-themes (i.e., intellectual bases) underlying methodo-
logical innovations in AL. The first is MULTIPLICITY, which is reflective of the multidimensionality of the
constructs examined in AL research; endeavors to reveal a fuller or bigger picture of the examined phe-
nomenon; a trend toward triangulation; and attempts to examine the intricate relationships between
variables. The second is INDIVIDUALITY, which is suggestive of the recognition of the importance of
examining individual variation; a greater focus on humanity and the wellbeing of stakeholders; and
the contributions of learner-internal factors to second language development. The third is the inves-
tigation of the PROCESS aspects of an examined phenomenon, referring to features, events, or events that
lead to outcomes but are not outcomes per se. The fourth is SOCIAL JUSTICE, which underlies themes
relating to underrepresented, marginalized, minoritized, or ignored languages, speech communities,
and sociolinguistic phenomena. The fifth is the need for increased PRACTICAL RELEVANCE of research
given the applied nature of the discipline. The sixth is QUALITY AND RIGOR, the primary driving force
behind all methodological innovations.
2.2 Interdisciplinary methodological innovation as an outcome of collaborative climate skeptical
research
In the second presentation, Shondel Nero (New York University) discussed interdisciplinary methodo-
logical innovation that emerged from collaborative research between herself (an applied linguist) and
Raul Lejano (New York University), an environmental policy scholar on CLIMATE SKEPTICISM (i.e., “anti-
scientific”narratives skeptical of climate change discourse).
Nero began by introducing the main issue –climate skepticism –noting that 38% of the US popu-
lation are climate skeptics (Leiserowitz et al., 2018) and that most of them are politically conservative.
In their co-authored book, Lejano and Nero (2020) sought to answer the question: How has the
climate skeptical narrative of a MINORITY of US citizens emerged, sustained itself, and become an ideol-
ogy over time? Nero reported that Lejano and Dodge’s(2017) narrative analysis work on the four
properties of an ideological narrative –AUTOPOIESIS (self-reinforcing), DECONTEXTUALIZATION,
INVARIANCE, and SATURATION –offered a methodological entry point to examine their data, which
552 Shaofeng Li et al.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X Published online by Cambridge University Press
were selected publicly available climate skeptical texts over a 20-year period in the US from 2000 to
2020. Narrative analysis, however, proved insufficient to explain how the typical elements of narrative
–plot, characters, audience, context –can become a powerful ideology from a minoritized position
over time. A methodological shift with a critical lens was necessary to filter these elements so they
could see how IDEOLOGICAL DISCOURSE is constructed and reinforced through narrative. This led to
Nero’s employing critical discourse analysis (CDA) (Fairclough, 2010) to examine how social struc-
tures, discourses, and power mutually determine each other, reflected in LANGUAGE at the micro (textual
evidence of claims), meso (voices and audience), and macro (the larger sociopolitical context) levels.
Nero created a Venn diagram showing the overlay of the common elements of narrative with prop-
erties of narrative analysis and CDA on either side, then filtered the analysis of Lejano and Nero’s
study data by asking critical questions, for example: What is the political affiliation and degree of
power of the characters and audience? What specific semantic and rhetorical strategies are employed
to tell the story, and for what purpose? How is the story disseminated? Through this combined ana-
lysis, Nero and Lejano found textual evidence of an evolving skeptical narrative over time that began
with the questioning of scientific facts, then critiquing and fighting back against the perceived moral
and financial dimensions of climate activism, then questioning the integrity of scientists themselves,
and finally formulating a grand conspiracy around scientists’intent to take away freedom from skep-
tics and “us”–a deeply entrenched ideology. Nero emphasized that the climate skeptical narrative is
framed strongly in binary (i.e., “us vs. them”) terms, which turns out NOT to be about science, but
about deep social fracturing in society –a frame that could be applied to any politically contentious
issue (e.g., gun rights, immigration, abortion). She concluded that the novel interweaving of narrative
and CDA thus offered a richer and more nuanced lens for data analysis, centering language across
disciplines, and revealed a tangible benefit of interdisciplinary collaboration.
2.3 Methodological innovations in studying complex systems in applied linguistics
In the third presentation, Phil Hiver (Florida State University), Ali H. Al-Hoorie (Royal Commission
for Jubail and Yanbu), and Akira Murakami (University of Birmingham) discussed methodological
innovations in studying complex systems in AL. They began by highlighting the innovative assump-
tions underlying research methods for studying complex systems –namely, that when researching
human and social phenomena, EVERYTHING COUNTS and EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED (i.e., the relational
principle), and EVERYTHING CHANGES (i.e., the adaptive principle). The consequences of adopting
these principles of complex dynamic systems theory (CDST) leads to new ways of understanding lear-
ners, their language development, and the role of instruction. It also leads to entirely new ways of see-
ing language itself and its use in multilingual and transnational social contexts (Douglas Fir Group,
2016). Methodological innovation in studying complex systems has yielded significant insights, not
least because the field is dealing with increasingly “wicked problems”and asking questions that are
increasingly complex. To take stock of the advances that CDST research has made in AL and its
accompanying methodological innovations, the authors then reported a scoping review of the heter-
ogenous body of research investigating complex systems by looking back at the methodological char-
acteristics of two decades of empirical CDST studies in the field to note trends in designs and
analytical choices (Hiver et al., 2022). This review highlighted the many strands of AL research that
have been informed by CDST and its innovative assumptions, as well as the substantive contributions
this body of research has made to AL. It is clear from this review that CDST research has allowed the
field to adopt a TRANSDISCIPLINARY STANCE that is more problem-oriented and that transcends disciplin-
ary boundaries (see also Larsen-Freeman, 2017). Finally, to add to the growing body of practical meth-
odological guidance for studying complex systems in AL, they showcased an innovative analytical
method –LOCATION SCALE MODELS –that enables the assessment of systematic change in within-person
variability and is useful for modeling between-person volatility, stability, and variation in development.
Such models can vary in complexity and include fixed or random effects, as with other conventional
analyses. Using a case study of Saudi L2 learners’writing development, they showed that combining
Language Teaching 553
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X Published online by Cambridge University Press
location scale models with Bayesian negative binomial regression also allows researchers to examine
nonlinearity in the change in variability. This talk examined ways CDST has expanded the toolbox
of research methods available through innovations for studying dynamic change in context and
interconnectedness.
2.4 Participatory linguistics in the translanguaging framework: What does it aim to achieve?
In the final presentation, Li Wei (University College London) explored the idea of participatory linguis-
tics from the perspective of translanguaging research. Informed by interpretative phenomenological ana-
lysis (Smith & Osborn, 2008), participatory linguistics sees the linguistic analyst’s job as trying to make
sense of the participants trying to make sense of their world, a “double hermeneutic.”What we are
observing as linguists is the participants trying to make sense of their world in real-life situations.
And in doing so, we are participating in their social world as well. Indeed, their social world becomes
part of ours and ours becomes part of theirs. The analyses of what we have observed is, therefore, neces-
sarily subjective, and we should not be afraid to say so. In fact, we as analysts have a responsibility to be
open and explicit about our own social, cultural, political and ideological stance in presenting our inter-
pretation and analysis and invite the reader to participate in our ANALYSIS AS A SOCIAL ACT.
Translanguaging as a decolonizing programme aims to transform the way we think and talk about
language, cognition, and education. We must recognize that we as linguists have given names to com-
municative practices in communities and called them Norwegian, Swedish, Hindi, Punjabi, Mandarin,
Cantonese, and so forth. Also, we often categorize the speakers/users of different languages as first,
second, or foreign language speakers/users. These names and categories carry specific social and pol-
itical connotations beyond simple linguistic labels. A set of abstract codes is highly unlikely to be
accorded any social status without a name or label. And the social status of the users is intrinsically
linked to the names and labels of the codes. Describing someone as a second language user of English
as opposed to a native speaker of Arabic can have serious social implications for their identity and
expectations of their linguistic competence. Whilst focusing on bilingual/multilingual language
users’linguistic practices including learning, translanguaging scholars see the linguist’s responsibility
not simply as describing which language is being used to whom and when, but to participate in a
social debate over the value of multilingualism and over the consequences of communities coming
together in the era of mobility and superdiversity.
Li Wei used two published studies to illustrate how participatory linguistics works in practice. In
the first study (Zhu & Li, 2022), three researchers with different positionalities took part in a
Scratch (a developing, semi-scripted performance involving audience feedback) by a London-based
Polish performing artist, taking on different roles in the performance. The participation led to deeper
understandings of the artist’s working and thinking, beyond observing her multilingual practices, as
well as changes in the researchers’own views on migration and ethnic identities. The second study
(Li et al., 2020) concerns Li Wei’s engagement with a group of young academics in Hong Kong
who are particularly interested in the changing communicative practices amongst young people, espe-
cially social media users. The young academics created a Facebook site to collect what they call
Kongish. Through multiplex (multiple + complex) interactions, views about Kongish shifted signifi-
cantly, from an inferior variety of English perspective to legitimate translanguaging practices.
The case studies show how multiplex participation not only helps to gain deeper and more holistic
understandings of the multilingual practices of communities and individuals, but also achieves trans-
formation of the researchers’own subjectivities.
3. Discussion and conclusion
Lourdes Ortega (Georgetown University) was the discussant of the colloquium. Commenting on the
first talk by Li, she highlighted the usefulness of his survey findings in illuminating what methodo-
logical innovation looks like in the minds of applied linguists. She noted the six mega-themes of meth-
odological innovation gleaned from Li’s bottom-up qualitative approach are particularly useful for
554 Shaofeng Li et al.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X Published online by Cambridge University Press
junior researchers learning to attune themselves to the spirit of the times in our discipline. Ortega then
offered some highlights of Nero’s talk, which chronicled the making of a book about the 20-year for-
mation of the ideology of climate skepticism that won the AAAL Book Award in 2022 (Lejano & Nero,
2020). Ortega noted the research fits method-combining in Li’s typology of innovation, in that the
book encapsulates a highly original combination of narrative analysis as practiced in the Lejano’s
field of environmental policy (Roe, 1994) with critical discourse analysis as practice in Nero’s field
of AL (Fairclough, 2010), but also strong collaborative and interdisciplinary qualities. Moreover, she
speculated that much interdisciplinary innovation may also be characterized by serendipity: as Nero
noted, the mutual agreement to collaborate was entirely serendipitous. Ortega thus encouraged applied
linguists aspiring to innovate, to be attentive and seize unplanned but opportune openings to collab-
orate across disciplines. Turning to the third talk by Hiver, Al-Hoorie, and Murakami, Ortega com-
mended the authors for their undertaking a much-needed scoping review of the burgeoning
research into language learning and learners as complex systems. She also lauded Hiver et al. for
their willingness to provide practical methodological guidance on how to study complex systems in
AL, present in all their work (e.g., Al-Hoorie et al., 2023), and also in this presentation through
their demonstration of location scale models that account statistically for between-person volatility,
stability, and variation in development. Finally, the third talk by Li Wei fitted in Li’s typology of inno-
vations, according to Ortega, as both illuminating a new trend or topic (e.g., translanguaging) and
adopting a new epistemology and approach (i.e., participatory linguistics). Ortega stressed that Li
Wei’s participatory linguistics is a deep departure from conventional research practices in the field,
as it invites applied linguists to blur the lines between participants and researcher and to theorize
from and with praxis, engaging in the responsibility of research-as-activism that many decolonial
(Mignolo & Walsh, 2018) and Indigenous (Phyak & De Costa, 2021) thinkers call for. Indeed, Li
Wei envisions a new research habitus that takes analysis as a social act. Coming full circle back to
Li’s survey of what 39 applied linguists understand under methodological innovation, Ortega con-
cluded her discussion with the hope that the diversity and excellence of the innovations presented
in this colloquium by Li, Nero, Hiver et al., and Li Wei will stand the test of healthy pluralism, so
that junior researchers in the field can look forward to engaging in innovative research contributions
that are tailored to their diverse talents and interests.
We plan to continue these important discussions around innovation in AL research through a spe-
cial issue of Research Methods in Applied Linguistics (Li & Prior, 2022).
References
Al-Hoorie, A. H., Hiver, P., Larsen-Freeman, D., & Lowie, W. (2023). From replication to substantiation: A complexity theory
perspective. Language Teaching,56(2), 276–291. doi:10.1017/S0261444821000409
Douglas Fir Group. (2016). A transdisciplinary framework for SLA in a multilingual world. Modern Language Journal,100
(s1), 19–47. doi:10.1111/modl.12301
Fairclough, N. (2010). Critical discourse analysis: The critical study of language (2nd ed.). Routledge.
Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., & Evans, R. (2022). Complex dynamic systems theory in language learning: A scoping review of
25 years of research. Studies in Second Language Acquisition,44(4), 913–941. doi:10.1017/S0272263121000553
Larsen-Freeman, D. (2017). Complexity theory: The lessons continue. In L. Ortega & Z. Han (Eds.), Complexity theory and
language development: In celebration of Diane Larsen-Freeman (pp. 12–50). John Benjamins.
Leiserowitz, A., Maibach, E., Roser-Renouf, C., Rosenthal, S., Cutler, M., & Kotcher, J. (2018). Climate change in the American
mind: March 2018. Yale University and George Mason University. Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
Lejano, R., & Dodge, J. (2017). The narrative properties of ideology: The adversarial turn and climate skepticism in the USA.
Policy Sciences,50(2), 195–215. doi:10.1007/s11077-016-9274-9
Lejano, R. P., & Nero, S. J. (2020). The power of narrative: Climate skepticism and the deconstruction of science. Oxford
University Press.
Li, S., & Prior, M. (2022). Research methods in applied linguistics: A methodological imperative. Research Methods in Applied
Linguistics,1(1), 1–6. doi:10.1016/j.rmal.2022.100008.
Li, W., Tsang, A., Wong, N., & Lok, P. (2020). Kongish daily: Researching translanguaging creativity and subversiveness.
International Journal of Multilingualism,17(3), 309–335. doi:10.1080/14790718.2020.1766465
Mignolo, W. D., & Walsh, C. E. (2018). On decoloniality: Concepts, analytics, praxis. Duke University Press.
Language Teaching 555
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X Published online by Cambridge University Press
Phyak, P., & De Costa, P. I. (2021). Decolonial struggles in indigenous language education in neoliberal times: Identities,
ideologies, and activism. Journal of Language, Identity & Education,20(5), 291–295. doi:10.1080/15348458.2021.1957683
Roe, E. (1994). Narrative policy analysis: Theory and practice. Duke University Press.
Smith, J., & Osborn, M. (2008). Interpretative phenomenological analysis. In J. Smith (Ed.), Qualitative psychology (2nd ed.,
pp. 53–80). Sage.
Zhu, H., & Li, W. (2022). Translanguaging in performance or performance in translanguaging. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, doi:10.1080/01434632.2022.2066109
Cite this article: Li, S., Prior, M., Nero, S., Hiver, P., Al-Hoorie, A. H., Murakami, A., Wei, L., & Ortega, L. (2023).
Methodological innovation in applied linguistics research: Perspectives, strategies, and trends. Language Teaching,56(4),
551–556. https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X
556 Shaofeng Li et al.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S026144482300023X Published online by Cambridge University Press