Studies in Second Language Acquisition· 2026Q1
Sharing transparently: Caring for trustworthiness in qualitative data analysis in L2 research
- 0citations
- Q1SCImago
- 2026year
Short summary
Most L2 qualitative research (50 articles analyzed) exhibits a "transparency gap," failing to detail analytical procedures, epistemological justification, multi-author collaboration, or methodological choices, undermining trustworthiness.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Key points
- 50 L2 empirical articles from top journals were analyzed for qualitative data analysis transparency.
- A "transparency gap" was identified, with most studies lacking epistemological justification and detailed analytic procedures.
- The "collaboration black box" of multi-author work and poorly explained methodological "mash-ups" were common issues.
- Findings suggest a need for stronger methodological accountability in L2 qualitative research to align with Open Science.
AI-generated from the title and abstract; the full text is not read.
Abstract
Abstract The Open Science (OS) movement promotes transparency across the research process. This study examines how transparently qualitative data analysis is reported in second language (L2) research, where unclear methods can undermine trustworthiness. We conducted a qualitative content analysis of 50 empirical articles, randomly sampled from the ten highest-ranked L2 journals (based on a combined SJR/JCR index) published between 2021 and 2025. Using Chenail’s (2009) triadic framework, we analyzed how authors (1) conceptually present their methodologies, (2) operationally describe data-analytic procedures, and (3) contextualize their methods within relevant literature. Findings reveal a substantial “transparency gap”: most studies label their methods (e.g., thematic or content analysis) yet provide limited epistemological justification, sparse detail on multi-author collaboration—the “collaboration black box”—and frequent, poorly explained methodological “mash-ups.” We argue for stronger methodological accountability by researchers, instructors, and journal gatekeepers to better align L2 qualitative research with core OS principles.
The authors' abstract, as published at the source. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 2026 · DOI ↗
Continue with a free account
Ask the paper: 3 free questions a day about this paper; save it, get its citation, new summaries every day for your field. Takeaways are Premium.
Continue free on the webSign in with Google or Apple; no card needed. You come back to this paper.
On your phone:
Field: Education
EducationSocial Sciences