How Big Is “Big”? Interpreting Effect Sizes in L2 Research

By Luke Plonsky, F. Oswald. 2014

1,819 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/7f1d9d99bdcaff33c9762abb94603517a6ace97b

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Foreign language enjoyment and anxiety: The effect of teacher and learner variables (2018, methodology): “…the FL was found to have a significant effect on FLE; df (3, 185), F = 24.8, p < .0001, eta2 = .287, Cohen’s d = 1.27, which is a large effect size (see Figure 5), and on FLCA; df (3, 185), F = 4.0, p < .009, eta2 = .069, Cohen’s d = .54: a small effect size (Plonsky & Oswald, 2014) (see Figure 6).”
Are foreign language learners’ enjoyment and anxiety specific to the teacher? An investigation into the dynamics of learners’ classroom emotions (2020, positive): “Differences were significant for five items (see Figure 3), with small effect sizes (Plonsky & Oswald, 2014).”
Eta- and partial eta-squared in L2 research: A cautionary review and guide to more appropriate usage (2018, methodology): “First, although effect sizes are regularly reported, they are not often interpreted and even less often are they interpreted meaningfully (see Larson-Hall and Plonsky, 2015; Plonsky and Oswald, 2014).”
BASIC PSYCHOLOGICAL NEEDS, MOTIVATIONAL ORIENTATIONS, EFFORT, AND VOCABULARY KNOWLEDGE (2021, background): “With regard to effect size, Plonsky and Oswald (2014) noted that correlation coefficients (r) in L2 research can be used as indicators of effect size; correlation coefficients that are close to .25, .40, and .60 are indicative of small, medium, and large effect sizes, respectively.”
TASK REPETITION AND SECOND LANGUAGE SPEECH PROCESSING (2016, methodology): “However, based on a comprehensive survey of research in the fi eld of SLA, Plonsky and Oswald ( 2014 ) argue that Cohen’s scale underestimates the range of effects typically obtained in L2 research, and they recommend fi eld-specifi c benchmarks of small ( d = .40), medium ( d = .70), and large ( d ”
Grit and language learning: construct validation of L2-Grit scale and its relation to later vocabulary knowledge (2021, methodology): “With regard to effect size, this study adopted the L2-specific benchmarks suggested by Plonsky and Oswald (2014) who noted that correlation coefficients (r) can be used as indicators of effect size: correlations coefficients that are close to 0.25, 0.40, and 0.60 are indicative of small, medium,…”