Methodological Synthesis of Working Memory Capacity Measures in Relative Clause Attachment Ambiguity Resolution Studies

The asterisked references are included in the methodological synthesis. 

Abdelghany, H., & Fodor, J. D. (1999, September). Low attachment of relative clauses in Arabic. Poster presented at AMLaP (Architectures and Mechanisms of Language Processing) (Vol. 99, pp. 23-25). Edinburgh, UK.

Arabmofrad, A., & Marefat, H. (2008). Relative clause attachment ambiguity resolution in Persian. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 11(1), 29-49. https://ijal.khu.ac.ir/article-1-71-fa.html

Ariji, K., Omaki, A., & Tatsuta, N. (2003). Working memory restricts the use of semantic  information in ambiguity resolution. In P. Slezak (Ed.), Proceedings of the 4^th International Conference on Cognitive Science. Sydney, Australia:  University of New South Wales, pp. 19-25.

Ary, D., Jacobs, L. C., Irvine, C. K. S., & Walker, D. (2019). Introduction to research in education (10^th ed.). Cengage Learning.

*Başer, Z. (2018). Syntactic priming of relative clause attachment in monolingual Turkish speakers and Turkish learners of English. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Middle East Technical University, Turkey. https://open.metu.edu.tr/bitstream/handle/11511/27252/index.pdf

Baumert, A., Buchholz, N., Zinkernagel, A., Clarke, P., MacLeod, C., Osinsky, R., & Schmitt, M. (2020). Causal underpinnings of working memory and Stroop interference control: testing the effects of anodal and cathodal tDCS over the left DLPFC. Cognitive, Affective, & Behavioral Neuroscience, 20(1), 34-48. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-019-00726-y

Bigby, M. (2009). The hierarchy of evidence. In H. Williams, M. Bigby, T. Diepgen, A. Herxheimer, L. Naldi & B. Rzany (Eds.) Evidence-based dermatology (pp. 34-37). John Wiley & Sons.

Boegle, R., Gerb, J., Kierig, E., Becker-Bense, S., Ertl-Wagner, B., Dieterich, M., & Kirsch, V. (2021). Intravenous delayed gadolinium-enhanced MR imaging of the endolymphatic space: a methodological comparative study. Frontiers in Neurology, 12, 360. https://doi.org/10.3389/fneur.2021.647296

Bolibaugh, C., & Marsden, E. (2021). Reproducibility and research integrity in applied linguistics. MetaArXiv. https://doi.org/10.31222/osf.io/3ucbv

Brown, H. D. (2014). Principles of language learning and teaching (6^th ed.). Longman.

Brysbaert, M., & Mitchell, D. C. (1996). Modifier attachment in sentence parsing: Evidence from Dutch. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 49(3), 664-695. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755636

Byrnes, H. (2013). Notes from the editor. The Modern Language Journal, 97(4), 825–827. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2013.12051.x

Carreiras, M. (1992). Estrategias de analisis sintactico en el procesamiento de frases: cierre temprano versus cierre ultimo [Strategies for syntactic analysis in sentence processing: early closure vs. late closure]. Cognitiva 4, 3–27. https://dialnet.unirioja.es/servlet/articulo?codigo=122589

Carreiras, M., & Clifton, C. (1999). Another word on parsing relative clauses: Eyetracking evidence from Spanish and English. Memory & Cognition, 27(5), 826-833. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03198535

*Cheng, Y., Rothman, J., & Cunnings, I. (2021). Parsing preferences and individual differences in nonnative sentence processing: Evidence from eye movements. Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(1), 129-151. https://doi.org/10.1017/S014271642000065X.

Conway, A. R., Kane, M. J., Bunting, M. F., Hambrick, D. Z., Wilhelm, O., & Engle, R. W. (2005). Working memory span tasks: A methodological review and user’s guide. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 12(5), 769-786. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196772.

Cooper, H., Hedges, L. V., & Valentine, J. C. (2019). Research synthesis as a scientific process. In H. Cooper, L. V. Hedges, & J. C. Valentine, (Eds.), The handbook of research synthesis and meta-analysis (pp. 3-18). Russell Sage Foundation.

Crowther, D., Kim, S., Lee, J., Lim, J., & Loewen, S. (2021). Methodological synthesis of cluster analysis in second language research. Language Learning, 71(1), 99-130. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12428.

Cuetos, F., & Mitchell, D. C. (1988). Cross-linguistic differences in parsing: Restrictions on the use of the Late Closure strategy in Spanish. Cognition, 30(1), 73-105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(88)90004-2.

*Dai, Y. (2015). Working memory in L2 sentence processing: The case with relative clause attachment. In Z. Wen, M. B. Mota, & A. McNeill (Eds.) Working memory in second language acquisition and processing (pp. 105-124). Multilingual Matters.

De Vincenzi, M., & Job, R. (1993). Some observations on the universality of the late-closure strategy. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 22(2), 189-206. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01067830

Derrick, D. J. (2016). Instrument reporting practices in second language research. TESOL Quarterly, 50(1), 132-153. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.217.

Dussias, P. E., & Sagarra, N. (2007). The effect of exposure on syntactic parsing in Spanish–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 10(1), 101-116. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728906002847

Ehrlich, K., Fernandez, E. M., Fodor, J. D., Stenshoel, E., & Vinereanu, M. (1999). Low attachment of relative clauses new data from Swedish, Norwegian, and Romanian. Poster presented at the 12^th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, (pp. 18-20). New York, NY. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1yej4wKh8BO06Ws3_BwsmJ5JksyrdJKlW/view

Elliott, M. N., Haviland, A. M., Kanouse, D. E., Hambarsoomian, K., & Hays, R. D. (2009). Adjusting for subgroup differences in extreme response tendency in ratings of health care: impact on disparity estimates. Health Services Research, 44(2p1), 542-561. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6773.2008.00922.x.

Farsani, M. A., & Babaii, E. (2020). Applied linguistics research in three decades: a methodological synthesis of graduate theses in an EFL context. Quality & Quantity, 54(4), 1257-1283. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11135-020-00984-w.

Farsani, M. A., Jamali, H. R., Beikmohammadi, M., Ghorbani, B. D., & Soleimani, L. (2021). Methodological orientations, academic citations, and scientific collaboration in applied linguistics: What do research synthesis and bibliometrics indicate? System, 100, 102547. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102547

Fedorova, O., & Yanovich, I. (2005). Early preferences in RC-attachment in Russian: The effect of Working Memory differences. In J. Lavine, S. Franks, M. Tasseva-Kurktchieva, & H. Filip (Eds.), Proceedings of FASL 14. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan Slavic Publications, 113–128.

Felser, C., Marinis, T., & Clahsen, H. (2003). Children’s processing of ambiguous sentences: A study of relative clause attachment. Language Acquisition, 11(3), 127–163.

Fernández, E. M. (2003). Bilingual sentence processing: Relative clause attachment in English and Spanish (Vol. 29). Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing.

Fernández, E. M., & Sekerina, I. A. (2015). The Interplay of visual and prosodic information in the attachment preferences of semantically shallow relative clauses. In L. Frazier & E. Gibson (Eds.), Explicit and Implicit Prosody in Sentence Processing (pp. 241-261). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-12961-7_13

Frazier, L. (1979). On comprehending sentences: Syntactic parsing strategies. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. University of Connecticut, Connecticut, USA. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/27401728_On_Comprehending_Sentences_Syntactic_Parsing_Strategies

Frenck-Mestre, C., & Pynte, J. (1997). Syntactic ambiguity resolution while reading in second and native languages. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 50A(1), 119–148. https://doi.org/10.1080/027249897392251

Hemforth, B., Konieczny, L. & Scheepers C. (2000) Modifier attachment: Relative clauses and coordinations. In B. Hemforth, & L. Konieczny (Eds.), German sentence processing. Studies in theoretical psycholinguistics, Vol. 24, (pp. 161-186). Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-9618-3_6

*Hocking, I. (2003). Resources and parsing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Exeter. https://ianhocking.com/thesis.pdf

*Hopp, H. (2014). Working memory effects in the L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses. Language Acquisition, 21(3), 250-278. https://doi.org/10.1080/10489223.2014.892943

Hou, Z., & Aryadoust, V. (2021). A review of the methodological quality of quantitative mobile-assisted language learning research. System, 100, 102568. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2021.102568

*James, A. N., Fraundorf, S. H., Lee, E. K., & Watson, D. G. (2018). Individual differences in syntactic processing: Is there evidence for reader-text interactions? Journal of Memory and Language, 102, 155-181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2018.05.006.

*Jun, S. A., & Bishop, J. (2015). Prominence in relative clause attachment: Evidence from prosodic priming. In L Frazier, E Gibson (Eds.), Explicit and Implicit Prosody in Sentence Processing (pp. 217-240). Springer.

Kamide, Y., & Mitchell, D. C. (1997). Relative clause attachment: Nondeterminism in Japanese parsing. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 26(2), 247-254. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1025017817290

*Kaya, M. (2012). Working memory and relative clause attachment preferences in Turkish: An eye-tracking study. Studia Uralo-Altaica, 49, 265-278. https://bit.ly/3BdSQOS  

*Kim, J. (2009). Working memory effects on L2 relative clause processing. 담화· 인지언어학회  학술대회  발표논문집, 59-67.  https://bit.ly/2XWRiKH 

*Kim, J. H., & Christianson, K. (2013). Sentence complexity and working memory effects in ambiguity resolution. Journal of psycholinguistic research, 42(5), 393-411. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-012-9224-4.

*Kim, J. H., & Christianson, K. (2017). Working memory effects on L1 and L2 processing of ambiguous relative clauses by Korean L2 learners of English. Second Language Research, 33(3), 365-388. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658315623322.

Leeser, M., & Sunderman, G. (2016). Methodological issues of working memory tasks for L2 processing research. In G. Granena, D. O. Jackson, & Y. Yilmaz (Eds.), Cognitive individual differences in second language processing and acquisition (pp. 89-104). John Benjamins. https://doi.org/10.1075/bpa.3

Li, S., Ellis, R., & Zhu, Y. (2019). The associations between cognitive ability and L2 development under five different instructional conditions. Applied Psycholinguistics, 40(3), 693-722. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000796

Li, S., & Wang, H. (2018). Traditional literature review and research synthesis. In A. Phakiti, P. De Costa, L. Plonsky, & S. Starfield (Eds.), The Palgrave handbook of applied linguistics research methodology (pp. 123-144). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-59900-1_6

Linck, J. A., Osthus, P., Koeth, J. T., & Bunting, M. F. (2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21, 861–883. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2

Liu, Q., & Brown, D. (2015). Methodological synthesis of research on the effectiveness of corrective feedback in L2 writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 30, 66-81. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2015.08.011.

Loewen, S., & Plonsky, L. (2015). An A–Z of applied linguistics research methods. Macmillan International Higher Education. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-137-40322-3_1

Lustig, C., May, C. P., & Hasher, L. (2001). Working memory span and the role of proactive interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 130(2), 199-207. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.130.2.199.

MacDonald, M. C., & Christiansen, M. H. (2002). Reassessing working memory: Comments on Just and Carpenter (1992) and Waters and Caplan (1996). Psychological Review, 109, 35–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037//033-295X.109.1.35.

Makel, M., & Plucker, J. (2014). Facts are more important than novelty: Replication in the education sciences. Educational Researcher, 43(6), 304-316. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X14545513

*Marefat, H., & Farzizadeh, B. (2018). Relative clause ambiguity resolution in L1 and L2: Are processing strategies transferred?. Iranian Journal of Applied Linguistics (IJAL), 21(1), 125-161. https://ijal.khu.ac.ir/article-1-2855-fa.html

*Marefat, H., Samadi, E., & Yaseri, M. (2015). Semantic priming effect on relative clause attachment ambiguity resolution in L2. Applied Research on English Language, 4(2), 78-95. https://are.ui.ac.ir/article_15504_57a77d169b7f27df38b964fad01f162c.pdf

Marsden, E. (2020). Methodological transparency and its consequences for the quality and scope of research. In J. McKinley & H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 15-28). Routledge.

Marsden, E., Mackey A., & Plonsky, L. (2016). The IRIS Repository: Advancing research practice and methodology. In A. Mackey & E. Marsden (Eds.), Advancing methodology and practice: The IRIS Repository of Instruments for Research into Second Languages (pp. 1-21). Routledge.

Marsden, E., Morgan-Short, K., Thompson, S., & Abugaber, D. (2018). Replication in second language research: Narrative and systematic reviews, and recommendations for the field. Language Learning, 68(2), 321–391. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12286.

Marsden, E., Thompson, S., & Plonsky, L. (2017). Open science in second language acquisition research: The IRIS repository of research materials and data. In SHS Web of Conferences (Vol. 38, p. 00013). EDP Sciences.

Marsden, E., Thompson, S., & Plonsky, L. (2018). A methodological synthesis of self-paced reading in second language research. Applied Psycholinguistics, 39(5), 861-904. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716418000036

McClean, S., Bray, I., Bray, I., de Viggiani, N., Bird, E., & Pilkington, P. (2019). Research methods for public health. Sage.

*Mendelsohn, A., & Pearlmutter, N. J. (1999). Individual differences in relative clause attachment ambiguities. Poster presented at the 12^th Annual CUNY Conference on Human Sentence Processing, City University of New York.

Messick, S. (1989). Meaning and values in test validation: The science and ethics of assessment. Educational researcher, 18(2), 5-11. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X018002005

Miyamoto, E. T. (1998). Relative clause processing in Brazilian Portuguese and Japanese. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Massachusetts, USA.  https://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/68344/42471751-MIT.pdf?sequence=2&isAllowed=y

Najjari, R., & Mohammadi, M. (2017). The Development of Reading and Operation Span Tasks in Persian as Measures of Working Memory Capacity for Iranian EFL Learners. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 36(2), 129-162. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2017.24688.2215

Nakanishi, T. (2015). A meta‐analysis of extensive reading research. TESOL Quarterly, 49(1), 6-37. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.157

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2000). Effectiveness of L2 instruction: A research synthesis and quantitative meta‐analysis. Language Learning, 50(3), 417-528. https://doi.org/10.1111/0023-8333.00136

Norris, J. M., & Ortega, L. (2006). The value and practice of research synthesis for language learning and teaching. In J. M. Norris, & L. Ortega (Eds.), Synthesizing research on language learning and teaching (pp. 3-50). John Benjamins Publishing.

*Omaki, A. (2005). Working memory and relative clause attachment in first and second language processing. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Hawaii. https://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/11603/uhm_ma_3245_r.pdf

Ortega, L. (2003). Syntactic complexity measures and their relationship to L2 proficiency: A research synthesis of college‐level L2 writing. Applied Linguistics, 24(4), 492-518. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/24.4.492

Oswald, F. L., & Plonsky, L. (2010). Meta-analysis in second language research: Choices and challenges. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 30, 85-110. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190510000115

Papadopoulou, D., & Clahsen, H. (2003). The role of lexical and contextual information in parsing ambiguous sentences in Greek. Department of Language and Linguistics, University of Essex.

*Payne, B. R., Grison, S., Gao, X., Christianson, K., Morrow, D. G., & Stine-Morrow, E. A. (2014). Aging and individual differences in binding during sentence understanding: Evidence from temporary and global syntactic attachment ambiguities. Cognition, 130(2), 157-173. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2013.10.005.

Pigott, T. D. (2012). Advances in meta-analysis. Springer.

Plonsky, L. (2014). Study quality in quantitative L2 research (1990–2010): A methodological synthesis and call for reform. The Modern Language Journal, 98(1), 450-470. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-4781.2014.12058.x.

Plonsky, L. (2017). Quantitative research methods. In S. Loewen & M. Sato (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of instructed second language research (pp. 505–521). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315676968  

Plonsky, L., & Gass, S. (2011). Quantitative Research Methods, Study Quality, and Outcomes: The Case of Interaction Research. Language Learning, 61(2), 325–366. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2011.00640.x

Plonsky, L., & Ghanbar, H. (2018). Multiple regression in L2 research: A methodological synthesis and guide to interpreting R² values. The Modern Language Journal, 102(4), 713-731. https://doi.org/10.1111/modl.12509.

Plonsky, L., & Gonulal, T. (2015). Methodological synthesis in quantitative L2 research: A review of reviews and a case study of exploratory factor analysis. Language Learning, 65(S1), 9-36. https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12111.

Plonsky, L., & Oswald, F. (2015). Meta-analyzing second language research. In L. Plonsky (Ed.), Advancing quantitative methods in second language research (pp. 106–128). Routledge.

Plonsky, L., Marsden, E., Crowther, D., Gass, S. M., & Spinner, P. (2020). A methodological synthesis and meta-analysis of judgment tasks in second language research. Second Language Research, 36(4), 583-621. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658319828413.

Rosenthal, R. (1979). The file drawer problem and tolerance for null results. Psychological Bulletin, 86(3), 638–641. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.3.638.

Shakki, F., Naeini, J., Mazandarani, O., & Derakhshan, A. (2020). Instructed second language English pragmatics in the Iranian context. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 39(1), 201-252. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2020.38481.2886

Samadi, E. (2014). Relative Clause Attachment Ambiguity Resolution in L2:  The Role of Semantics. Unpublished master’s thesis. The University of Tehran. http://utdlib.ut.ac.ir/PDFViewer/_PDFViewer/38962

Samavarchi, L. & Rezai, M. J.  (2014). Online Processing of English Wh-Dependencies by Iranian EFL Learners. Journal of Teaching Language Skills, 32(4), 63-83. https://doi.org/10.22099/jtls.2014.1856

Shariat, M. (2019). Relative clause ambiguity resolution: A case for individual differences among second language learners. Unpublished master’s thesis. The University of Tehran. http://utdlib.ut.ac.ir/PDFViewer/_PDFViewer/109743

Sheykholmoluki, H. (2014). Memory span and proficiency: Do they affect attachment  preference of Persian l2 learners of English? Unpublished master’s thesis. The University of Tehran. http://utdlib.ut.ac.ir/PDFViewer/_PDFViewer/39235

Shin, J. (2020). A meta-analysis of the relationship between working memory and second language reading comprehension: Does task type matter? Applied Psycholinguistics, 41, 873-900. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000272

Sok, S., Kang, E. Y., & Han, Z. (2019). Thirty-five years of ISLA on form-focused instruction: A methodological synthesis. Language Teaching Research, 23(4), 403-427. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168818776673.

Soleimani, E. (2018). Relative clause ambiguity resolution by second language learners of English:  Impact of WMC and discourse cues. Unpublished master’s thesis. University of Tehran. http://utdlib.ut.ac.ir/PDFViewer/_PDFViewer/108119

Swets, B., Desmet, T., Hambrick, D. Z., & Ferreira, F. (2007). The role of working memory in syntactic ambiguity resolution: a psychometric approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136(1), 64-81. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.136.1.64.

Traxler, M. J. (2007). Working memory contributions to relative clause attachment processing: A hierarchical linear modeling analysis. Memory & Cognition, 35(5), 1107-1121. https://doi.org/10.3758/bf03193482.

Traxler, M. J. (2009). A hierarchical linear modeling analysis of working memory and implicit prosody in the resolution of adjunct attachment ambiguity. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 38(5), 491-509. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-009-9102-x.

Whitney, P., & Budd, D. (1999). A separate language-interpretation resource: Premature fractionation? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22(1), 113-113. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x99421788.

Yeh, L. H. (2011). The role of cross-language activation in syntactic ambiguity. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. The University of Texas at El Paso. https://scholarworks.utep.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=3614&context=open_etd

Zhang, M., & Plonsky, L. (2020). Collaborative writing in face-to-face settings: A substantive and methodological review. Journal of Second Language Writing, 49, 100753. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2020.100753

Ziegler, N. (2016). Synchronous computer-mediated communication and interaction. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 38(3), 553-586. https://doi.org/10.1017/S027226311500025X.