SSCI Dizinli Dil ve Dilbilim Dergilerinin Bibliyometrik Analizleri Üzerine Betimsel İçerik Analizi

Abstract

Çeşitli disiplinlerde artan sayıda bibliyometrik çalışmaya rağmen, SSCI dizinli dil ve dilbilim dergilerine odaklanan konsolide analiz eksikliği vardır. Bu çalışma, tanımlayıcı içerik analizi yaklaşımıyla SSCI dizinli dil ve dilbilim dergileri üzerine bibliyometrik araştırmaların bir panoramasını sunmaktadır. Özellikle, sıklıkla analiz edilen dergileri, bu çalışmalarda kullanılan ölçübirimleri, yıllar içindeki yayın eğilimlerini, yüksek ve düşük etkili dergiler arasındaki bibliyometrik farklılıkları ve yazarların kurumsal/coğrafi dağılımını ele almaktadır. Sonuç olarak, az araştırılmış dergileri ve daha fazla bibliyometrik dikkat gerektiren ilgili bibliyometrik eğilimleri ortaya çıkarmayı amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaçla, SCImago taraması kullanılarak 629 ilgili dergi belirlenmiştir. İki yüz yirmi dördü, Web of Science (WoS) Çekirdek Dergi Listesi aracılığıyla SSCI endekslemesi için doğrulanmıştır. Dahil etme ve hariç tutma kriterleri belirlendikten sonra, WoS Çekirdek Koleksiyonu kullanılarak bir anahtar kelime sorgusu gerçekleştirilmiştir. Sonuçlar, 1984-2023 yılları arasında 20 dergiyi analiz eden 18 bibliyometrik çalışma olduğunu göstermiştir. Yaygın olarak kullanılan ölçübirimler benzerlik gösterse de (örneğin, atıf, anahtar kelime, yazarlık, bağlılık, coğrafi dağılım ve araştırma konuları analizleri), beş çalışma bireysel odaklara sahiptir (örneğin, metodolojik özellikler ve etki faktörü). Çalışmaların çoğu çok yazarlı yayınlardır ve %33,33'ü uluslararası işbirliğine dayanmaktadır. Yıllık bilimsel üretim, uzun süreli durgunluk ve dalgalanmalara rağmen 2022 ve 2023 yıllarında zirve yapmıştır. Bibliyometrik olarak analiz edilen dergilerin etki faktörleri çeşitlilik göstermiştir. Coğrafi dağılım ABD ve Çin'in baskınlığını gösterirken, onları İspanya takip etmiştir. Yazarların çoğunun dört kurumla bağlantılı olduğu bulunmuştur. Analizler dil ve dilbilim dergilerinin bibliyometrik haritalamasında büyük bir literatür boşluğu olduğunu göstermektedir. Bu analiz, genel olarak bibliyometrik uygulamaların ve dil ve dilbilimdeki araştırma değerlendirmesi için bunların çıkarımlarının daha derin bir şekilde anlaşılmasına katkıda bulunmaktadır. Gelecekteki araştırmalar, alanda daha kapsamlı ve adil değerlendirmeler sağlamak için yeterince temsil edilmeyen dergilerin sistematik bibliyometrik haritalamasına öncelik vermelidir.

Keywords

• bibliometrik analiz
• betimleyici içerik analizi
• dil ve dilbilim
• araştırma eğilimleri
• SSCI endeksli dergiler

A Descriptive Content Analysis of Bibliometric Analyses of SSCI-Indexed Language and Linguistics Journals

Abstract

Despite a growing number of bibliometric studies in various disciplines, there is a lack of consolidated analysis focusing on SSCI-indexed language and linguistics journals. Through a descriptive content analysis approach, this study offers a panorama of bibliometric research on SSCI-indexed language and linguistics journals. Specifically, it addresses the frequently analyzed journals, the metrics used in these studies, publication trends over the years, bibliometric differences between high- and low-impact journals, and institutional/geographical distribution of authors. Consequently, it intends to reveal under-researched journals and relevant bibliometric trends that warrant further bibliometric attention. To this end, 629 relevant journals were identified using a SCImago search. Two hundred twenty-four were validated for SSCI-indexation through the Web of Science (WoS) Master Journal List. After establishing the inclusion and exclusion criteria, a keyword query was performed using the WoS Core Collection. Results indicated 18 bibliometric studies analyzing 20 journals between 1984 and 2023. Commonly used metrics showed similarities, albeit five studies with individual foci (e.g., methodological characteristics and impact factor). Most studies were multiple-authored publications, with 33.33% international collaboration. The annual scientific production peaked in 2022 and 2023 despite long-lasting stagnation and fluctuations. The bibliometrically analyzed journals had varied impact factors. Geographical distribution showed U.S. and Chinese dominance, followed by Spain. Analyses suggest a vast literature gap in bibliometric mapping of language and linguistics journals. Altogether, this analysis contributes to a deeper understanding of bibliometric practices and their implications for research evaluation in language and linguistics.

Keywords

• bibliometric analysis
• descriptive content analysis
• language and linguistics
• research trends
• SSCI-indexed journals

References

1. Anderson, J. (2017). A potted history of PPP with the help of ELT Journal. ELT Journal, 71(2), 218-227. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/ccw055
2. Ayoub, A., Amin, R., & Wani, Z. A. (2023). Exploring the impact of altmetrics in relation to citation count and SCImago journal rank (SJR). Journal of Scientometric Research, 12(3), 603-608. https://doi.org/10.5530/jscires.12.3.058
3. Batista-Canino, R. M., Santana-Hernández, L., & Medina-Brito, P. (2023). A scientometric analysis on entrepreneurial intention literature: Delving deeper into local citation. Heliyon, 9(2), e13046. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e13046
4. Bawden, D., & Robinson, L. (2012). Introduction to information science. Facet.
5. Beatty, M. J., Feeley, T. H., & Dodd, M. D. (2012). Journal impact factor or intellectual influence? A content analysis of citation use in Communication Monographs and Human Communication Research (2007–2009). Public Relations Review, 38(1), 174-176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.08.005
6. Birgili, B., Seggie, F. N., & Oğuz, E. (2021). The trends and outcomes of flipped learning research between 2012 and 2018: A descriptive content analysis. Journal of Computers in Education, 8(3), 365-394. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40692-021-00183-y
7. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa
8. Calik, M., & Sözbilir, M. (2014). Parameters of content analysis. Egitim ve Bilim-Education and Science, 39(174), 33-38. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/EB.2014.3412

9. Caraveo-Ramos, L. E. (1984). Personal and institutional sources of manuscripts and book reviews in the Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 1979-1983. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences, 6(1), 3-11. https://doi.org/10.1177/07399863840061002
10. Çevik, M. S. (2024). Research on authentic leadership in Türkiye: A descriptive content analysis study. Anadolu Journal of Educational Sciences International, 14(2), 759-792. https://doi.org/10.18039/ajesi.1285849
11. Chen, R., & Liu, H. (2014). Quantitative aspects of journal of quantitative linguistics. Journal of Quantitative Linguistics, 21(4), 299-340. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296174.2014.944327
12. Clarivate Analytics. (2024). Social sciences citation index. Retrieved 10.11.2024, from https://shorturl.at/dYK2p
13. Clarivate Analytics. (n.d.). Web of Science Master Journal List. https://mjl.clarivate.com/home
14. Clarivate Analytics. (n.d.). Web of Science. https://www.webofscience.com/wos/
15. Cohen, L., Manion, L., & Morrison, K. (2007). Research methods in education (6th ed.). Routledge.
16. Comel, N., Marques, F. P. J., Prendin Costa, L. O., Kohls, C., & Orso, M. (2023). Who navigates the “elite” of communication journals? The participation of BRICS universities in top-ranked publications. Online Media and Global Communication, 2(4), 497-543. https://doi.org/10.1515/omgc-2023-0052
17. Comel, N., Marques, F. P. J., Prendin Costa, L. O., Kohls, C., & Orso, M. (2023). Who navigates the “elite” of communication journals? The participation of BRICS universities in top-ranked publications. Online Media and Global Communication, 2(4), 497-543. https://doi.org/10.1515/omgc-2023-0052
18. Costas, R., & Bordons, M. (2007). The h-index: Advantages, limitations and its relation with other bibliometric indicators at the micro level. Journal of Informetrics, 1(3), 193-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2007.02.001
19. Crea, F., Guzik, T., & Kavaney, A. F. (2023). The Journal Citation Indicator: what is the relevance of this new metric?. Cardiovascular Research, 119(10), 1885-1886. https://doi.org/10.1093/cvr/cvad001
20. Dao, L. T., Tran, T., Van Le, H., Nguyen, G. N., & Trinh, T. P. T. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of Research on Education 4.0 during the 2017–2021 period. Education and Information Technologies, 28(3), 2437-2453. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-022-11211-4
21. Darvish, H., & Tonta, Y. (2016). Diffusion of nanotechnology knowledge in Turkey and its network structure. Scientometrics, 107, 569-592. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-016-1854-0
22. Dong, M., Gan, C., Zheng, Y., & Yang, R. (2022). Research trends and development patterns in language testing over the past three decades: A bibliometric study. Frontiers in Psychology, 13,1-15. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.801604
23. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., & Pattnaik, D. (2020). Forty-five years of Journal of Business Research: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Business Research, 109, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2019.10.039
24. Donthu, N., Kumar, S., Mukherjee, D., Pandey, N., & Lim, W. M. (2021). How to conduct a bibliometric analysis: An overview and guidelines. Journal of Business Research, 133, 285-296. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2021.04.070
25. Egbert, M., Yufu, M., & Hirataka, F. (2016). An investigation of how 100 articles in the Journal of Pragmatics treat transcripts of English and non-English languages. Journal of Pragmatics, 94, 98-111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2016.01.010
26. Ellegaard, O. (2018). The application of bibliometric analysis: disciplinary and user aspects. Scientometrics, 116(1), 181-202. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-018-2765-z
27. Escudero, M. P., & Swales, J. M. (2011). Tracing convergence and divergence in pairs of Spanish and English research article abstracts. Ibérica, (21), 49-70. https://www.revistaiberica.org/index.php/iberica/article/view/328/314
28. Gao, F., & Wright, W. E. (2020). A systematic analysis of five years of research articles published in the Journal of Language, Identity, and Education (2015-2019). Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 19(1), 3-8. https://doi.org/10.1080/15348458.2020.1715760
29. Garfield, E. (2007). The evolution of the science citation index. International Microbiology, 10(1), 65-69. https://doi.org/10.2436/20.1501.01.10
30. Goksu, I., Ozkaya, E., & Gunduz, A. (2022). The content analysis and bibliometric mapping of CALL journal. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 35(8), 2018-2048. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2020.1857409
31. Gómez, L. F., Montoya-Rendón, A. F., & Vélez-Uribe, J. P. (2024). Distribution by country, region, and publisher in environmental engineering journals in SCImago Journal and Country Rank database (1999–2022). Scientometrics, 129(9), 5769-5782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05121-0
32. Gómez, L. F., Montoya-Rendón, A. F., & Vélez-Uribe, J. P. (2024). Distribution by country, region, and publisher in environmental engineering journals in SCImago Journal and Country Rank database (1999–2022). Scientometrics, 129(9), 5769-5782. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-024-05121-0
33. Gutiérrez-Salcedo, M., Martínez, M. Á., Moral-Munoz, J. A., Herrera-Viedma, E., & Cobo, M. J. (2018). Some bibliometric procedures for analyzing and evaluating research fields. Applied intelligence, 48, 1275-1287. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-017-1105-y
34. Hardwicke, T. E., Mathur, M. B., MacDonald, K., Nilsonne, G., Banks, G. C., Kidwell, M. C., ... & Frank, M. C. (2018). Data availability, reusability, and analytic reproducibility: Evaluating the impact of a mandatory open data policy at the journal Cognition. Royal Society Open Science, 5(8), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.180448
35. Hernández-Vásquez, A., & Rosselli, D. (2017). A bibliometric analysis of the global research on sofosbuvir. F1000Research, 6, 1536. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.12314.1
36. Hirsch, J. E. (2005). An index to quantify an individual’s scientific research output. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(46), 16569–16572. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0507655102
37. Hodgson, J., & Wilkin, S. (2014). English in education: The first fifty years. English in Education, 48(3), 196-229. https://doi.org/10.1111/eie.12048
38. Jiang, G. K., & Jiang, Y. (2023). More diversity, more complexity, but more flexibility: research article titles in TESOL Quarterly, 1967–2022. Scientometrics, 128(7), 3959-3980. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-023-04738-x
39. Kandal, R., & Baş, F. (2022). The descriptive content analysis of theses with the topic of metacognition published in Turkey on mathematics education. Journal of Education and Future, (21), 83-97. https://doi.org/10.30786/jef.835078
40. Kartal, G., & Yeşilyurt, Y. E. (2024). A bibliometric analysis of artificial intelligence in L2 teaching and applied linguistics between 1995 and 2022. ReCALL, 36(3), 359-375. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344024000077
41. Kılavuz, F. (2023). Education with flipped classroom model in Turkey: A descriptive content analysis. International Journal of Field Education, 10(1), 36-57. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/download/article-file/3511395
42. Kirner-Ludwig, M. (2022). Data collection methods applied in studies in the journal intercultural pragmatics (2004–2020): A scientometric survey and mixed corpus study. Intercultural Pragmatics, 19(4), 459-487. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2022-4002
43. Knobloch-Westerwick, S., & Glynn, C. J. (2013). The Matilda effect—Role congruity effects on scholarly communication: A citation analysis of Communication Research and Journal of Communication articles. Communication Research, 40(1), 3-26. https://doi.org/10.1177/0093650211418339
44. Larivière, V., & Sugimoto, C.R. (2019) The journal impact factor: A brief history, critique, and discussion of adverse effects. In: W. Gl€anzel, H.F. Moed, U. Schmoch, & M. Thelwall (Eds.), Springer handbook of science and technology indicators. Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-02511-3_1
45. Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019). Research trends in applied linguistics from 2005 to 2016: A bibliometric analysis and its implications. Applied Linguistics, 40(3), 540-561. https://doi.org/10.1093/applin/amy003
46. Lei, L., & Liu, D. (2019). The research trends and contributions of System’s publications over the past four decades (1973–2017): A bibliometric analysis. System, 80, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2018.10.003
47. Leydesdorff, L. & Milojević, S. (2015). Scientometrics. In M. Lynch (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social and behavioral sciences (pp 322–327). Elsevier.
48. Li, R. (2022). Research trends of blended language learning: A bibliometric synthesis of SSCI-indexed journal articles during 2000–2019. ReCALL, 34(3), 309-326. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0958344021000343
49. Li, W., & Liu, H. (2013). Language problems and language planning: A corpus-based historical investigation. Language Problems and Language Planning, 37(2), 151-177. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.37.2.03lil
50. Liao, Y. P., & Ma, T. J. (2018). Institutional repositories: A bibliometric study of the social sciences citation index (SSCI). The Electronic Library, 36(3), 504-517. https://doi.org/10.1108/EL-09-2017-0192
51. Lindstromberg, S. (2016). Inferential statistics in Language Teaching Research: A review and ways forward. Language Teaching Research, 20(6), 741-768. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816649979
52. Liu, Y., & Hu, G. (2024). Research trends in applied linguistics (2017–2021): A scientometric review of 42 journals. In H. Meihami & R. Esfandiari (Eds.), A scientometrics research perspective in applied linguistics (pp. 45-81). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-51726-6_3
53. Mammola, S., Fontaneto, D., Martínez, A., & Chichorro, F. (2021). Impact of the reference list features on the number of citations. Scientometrics, 126, 785-799. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03759-0
54. Mejia, C., Wu, M., Zhang, Y., & Kajikawa, Y. (2021). Exploring topics in bibliometric research through citation networks and semantic analysis. Frontiers in Research Metrics and Analytics, 6, 742311. https://doi.org/10.3389/frma.2021.742311
55. Mestre, V., Tortosa, F., Samper, P., & Nácher, M. J. (2003). Three decades of psychological research in the journal Cognitive Psychology (1979–1999). Psychological Reports, 93(3), 972-982. https://doi.org/10.2466/pr0.2003.93.3.972
56. Mongeon, P., & Paul-Hus, A. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus: a comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 106, 213-228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5
57. Mukherjee, D., Lim, W. M., Kumar, S., & Donthu, N. (2022). Guidelines for advancing theory and practice through bibliometric research. Journal of Business Research, 148, 101-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2022.04.042
58. Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2010). The h‐index: A broad review of a new bibliometric indicator. Journal of Documentation, 66(5), 681-705. https://doi.org/10.1108/00220411011066790
59. Nuessel, F. (2013). Sixty years of NAMES: A Journal of Onomastics. Names, 61(1), 3-7. https://doi.org/10.1179/0027773812Z.00000000036
60. Olaleye, S. A., Mogaji, E., Agbo, F. J., Ukpabi, D., & Gyamerah Adusei, A. (2023). The composition of data economy: A bibliometric approach and TCCM framework of conceptual, intellectual and social structure. Information Discovery and Delivery, 51(2), 223-240. https://doi.org/10.1108/IDD-02-2022-0014
61. Pagani, R. N., Kovaleski, J. L., & Resende, L. M. (2015). Methodi Ordinatio: a proposed methodology to select and rank relevant scientific papers encompassing the impact factor, number of citation, and year of publication. Scientometrics, 105, 2109-2135. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1744-x
62. Passas, I. (2024). Bibliometric analysis: the main steps. Encyclopedia, 4(2), 1014-1025. https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia4020065
63. Pranckutė, R. (2021). Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications, 9(1), 1-59. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9010012
64. Riazi, A. M., Ghanbar, H., & Fazel, I. (2020). The contexts, theoretical and methodological orientation of EAP research: Evidence from empirical articles published in the Journal of English for Academic Purposes. Journal of English for Academic Purposes, 48, 1-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeap.2020.100925
65. Riazi, A. M., Ghanbar, H., Marefat, F., & Fazel, I. (2023). Review and analysis of empirical articles published in TESOL Quarterly over its lifespan. Studies in Second Language Learning and Teaching, 13(4), 811-841. https://doi.org/10.14746/ssllt.40217
66. Riazi, M., Shi, L., & Haggerty, J. (2018). Analysis of the empirical research in the journal of second language writing at its 25th year (1992–2016). Journal of Second Language Writing, 41, 41-54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jslw.2018.07.002
67. Riffe, D., Lacy, S., Watson, B. R., & Lovejoy, J. (2023). Analyzing media messages: Using quantitative content analysis in research. Routledge.
68. Sabiote, C. R., & Rodríguez, J. A. (2015). Bibliometric study and methodological quality indicators of the journal Porta Linguarum during six year period 2008-2013. Porta Linguarum: Revista Internacional de Didáctica de las Lenguas Extranjeras, 24, 135-150. http://dx.doi.org/10.30827/Digibug.53866
69. SCImago Journal & Country Rank. (2024). Linguistics and language journals indexed in WoS. Retrieved 10.11.2024, from https://shorturl.at/KzviC
70. Selçuk, Z., Palancı, M., Kandemir, M. & Dündar, H. (2014). Tendencies of the researches published in education and science journal: Content analysis. Education and Science, 39(173), 430-453. http://dx.doi.org/10.15390/eb.v39i173.3278
71. Selvi, A. F. (2020). Qualitative content analysis. In J. McKinley & H. Rose (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of research methods in applied linguistics (pp. 440-452). Routledge.
72. Singh, V. K., Singh, P., Karmakar, M., Leta, J., & Mayr, P. (2021). The journal coverage of Web of Science, Scopus and Dimensions: A comparative analysis. Scientometrics, 126, 5113-5142. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-021-03948-5
73. Sprouse, J., Schütze, C. T., & Almeida, D. (2013). A comparison of informal and formal acceptability judgments using a random sample from Linguistic Inquiry 2001–2010. Lingua, 134, 219-248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lingua.2013.07.002
74. Stahlschmidt, S., & Stephen, D. (2022). From indexation policies through citation networks to normalized citation impacts: Web of Science, Scopus, and Dimensions as varying resonance chambers. Scientometrics, 127(5), 2413-2431. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-022-04309-6
75. Stapleton, P., & Shao, Q. (2018). Research in language teaching over two decades: A retrospective of the first 20 volumes of Language Teaching Research. Language Teaching Research, 22(3), 350-369. https://doi.org/10.1177/1362168816688929
76. Stark, J. (2010). Thirty years before Topics in Language Disorders: A personal history. Topics in Language Disorders, 30(1), 15-21. https://doi.org/10.1097/TLD.0b013e3181d0a08a
77. Steinhardt, I., Schneijderberg, C., Götze, N., Baumann, J., & Krücken, G. (2017). Mapping the quality assurance of teaching and learning in higher education: the emergence of a specialty?. Higher Education, 74, 221-237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-016-0045-5
78. Tait, J., & Wilks, Y. (2019). Anniversary article: Then and now: 25 years of progress in natural language engineering. Natural Language Engineering, 25(3), 405-418. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1351324919000081
79. Vaccaro, G., Sánchez-Núñez, P., & Witt-Rodríguez, P. (2022). Bibliometrics evaluation of scientific journals and country research output of dental research in Latin America using Scimago journal and country rank. Publications, 10(3), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10030026
80. Vaccaro, G., Sánchez-Núñez, P., & Witt-Rodríguez, P. (2022). Bibliometrics evaluation of scientific journals and country research output of dental research in Latin America using Scimago Journal and Country Rank. Publications, 10(3), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications10030026
81. Vitta, J. P., & Al-Hoorie, A. H. (2017). Scopus-and SSCI-indexed L2 journals: A list for the Asia TEFL community. Journal of Asia TEFL, 14(4), 784-792. http://dx.doi.org/10.18823/asiatefl.2017.14.4.14.784
82. Wu, J. F., & Tsai, H. L. (2024). Research trends in English as a medium of instruction: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 45(5), 1792-1811. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2022.2088767
83. Xin, S., Ping, W., & Qin, Y. (2024). Twenty years’ development of translanguaging: A bibliometric analysis. International Journal of Multilingualism, 21(1), 209-235. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2021.2007933
84. Yan, L., & Zhiping, W. (2023). Mapping the literature on academic publishing: a bibliometric analysis on WOS. Sage Open, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440231158562
85. Yan, M., & Wu, X. (2024). Prosody in linguistic journals: a bibliometric analysis. Humanities and Social Sciences Communications, 11(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-024-02825-9
86. Yang, R., Xu, L., & Swales, J. M. (2023). Tracing the development of English for Specific Purposes over four decades (1980–2019): A bibliometric analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 71, 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2023.04.004
87. Yang, R., Xu, L., & Swales, J. M. (2023). Tracing the development of English for Specific Purposes over four decades (1980–2019): A bibliometric analysis. English for Specific Purposes, 71, 149-160. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esp.2023.04.004
88. Zhang, X. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of second language acquisition between 1997 and 2018. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 42(1), 199-222. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263119000573
89. Zheng, Y., & Yu, S. (2019). What has been assessed in writing and how? Empirical evidence from Assessing Writing (2000–2018). Assessing Writing, 42, 100421. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.100421
90. Zhong, X., & Liu, H. (2023). A bibliometric analysis of the IRAL over the past six decades. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 61(1), 155-200. https://doi.org/10.1515/iral-2022-0088
91. Zhu, J., & Liu, W. (2020). A tale of two databases: The use of Web of Science and Scopus in academic papers. Scientometrics, 123(1), 321-335. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-020-03387-8