The role of cognitive individual differences in digital versus pen-and-paper writing

It is unknown whether and to what extent cognitive individual differences may play different roles in paper versus computer-based second language (L2) writing. This exploratory study is a first attempt to explore this issue, focusing on the effects of working memory and language aptitude on the quality of paper versus computer-based L2 writing performance. Forty-two Spanish learners of L2 English performed a problem-solving task either digitally or on paper, took a working memory n-back test, and completed LLAMA tests to measure language aptitude. The quality of their L2 written texts was assessed in terms of complexity, accuracy and fluency (CAF) measures. The results indicated that the role of cognitive individual differences may vary depending on the writing environment

A primer on qualitative research synthesis in TESOL

Secondary research in the form of literature reviews facilitates consolidation and transfer of knowledge. In the field of TESOL, the majority of secondary research is conducted in the form of narrative reviews, which rely on the Plonsky’s selection and interpretation of primary studies and findings. Systematic reviews, which can be broadly categorized into meta-analysis (focusing on quantitative data) and qualitative research synthesis (focusing on qualitative data), are gaining popularity (see Plonsky, 2017) but are still less common. In particular, qualitative data collected from language classrooms, which are often criticized because of their lack of generalizability, are seldom synthesized in a systematic fashion. Against this backdrop, this article first attempts to make a case for conducting qualitative research synthesis in the field of TESOL. Second, this article provides a methodological framework and an example of how qualitative research synthesis can be conducted. The article closes with recommendations to promote qualitative research synthesis in the field of TESOL.Publisher PDFPeer reviewe

Intracellular curvature-generating proteins in cell-to-cell fusion

Cell-to-cell fusion plays an important role in normal physiology and in different pathological conditions. Early fusion stages mediated by specialized proteins and yielding fusion pores are followed by a pore expansion stage that is dependent on cell metabolism and yet unidentified machinery. Because of a similarity of membrane bending in the fusion pore rim and in highly curved intracellular membrane compartments, in the present study we explored whether changes in the activity of the proteins that generate these compartments affect cell fusion initiated by protein fusogens of influenza virus and baculovirus. We raised the intracellular concentration of curvature-generating proteins in cells by either expressing or microinjecting the ENTH (epsin N-terminal homology) domain of epsin or by expressing the GRAF1 (GTPase regulator associated with focal adhesion kinase 1) BAR (Bin/amphiphysin/Rvs) domain or the FCHo2 (FCH domain-only protein 2) F-BAR domain. Each of these treatments promoted syncytium formation. Cell fusion extents were also influenced by treatments targeting the function of another curvature-generating protein, dynamin. Cell-membrane-permeant inhibitors of dynamin GTPase blocked expansion of fusion pores and dominant-negative mutants of dynamin influenced the syncytium formation extents. We also report that syncytium formation is inhibited by reagents lowering the content and accessibility of PtdIns(4,5)P2, an important regulator of intracellular membrane remodelling. Our findings indicate that fusion pore expansion at late stages of cell-to-cell fusion is mediated, directly or indirectly, by intracellular membrane-shaping proteins

Creative destruction in science

Drawing on the concept of a gale of creative destruction in a capitalistic economy, we argue that initiatives to assess the robustness of findings in the organizational literature should aim to simultaneously test competing ideas operating in the same theoretical space. In other words, replication efforts should seek not just to support or question the original findings, but also to replace them with revised, stronger theories with greater explanatory power. Achieving this will typically require adding new measures, conditions, and subject populations to research designs, in order to carry out conceptual tests of multiple theories in addition to directly replicating the original findings. To illustrate the value of the creative destruction approach for theory pruning in organizational scholarship, we describe recent replication initiatives re-examining culture and work morality, working parents\u2019 reasoning about day care options, and gender discrimination in hiring decisions. Significance statement It is becoming increasingly clear that many, if not most, published research findings across scientific fields are not readily replicable when the same method is repeated. Although extremely valuable, failed replications risk leaving a theoretical void\u2014 reducing confidence the original theoretical prediction is true, but not replacing it with positive evidence in favor of an alternative theory. We introduce the creative destruction approach to replication, which combines theory pruning methods from the field of management with emerging best practices from the open science movement, with the aim of making replications as generative as possible. In effect, we advocate for a Replication 2.0 movement in which the goal shifts from checking on the reliability of past findings to actively engaging in competitive theory testing and theory building. Scientific transparency statement The materials, code, and data for this article are posted publicly on the Open Science Framework, with links provided in the article

Crowdsourcing hypothesis tests: Making transparent how design choices shape research results

To what extent are research results influenced by subjective decisions that scientists make as they design studies? Fifteen research teams independently designed studies to answer fiveoriginal research questions related to moral judgments, negotiations, and implicit cognition. Participants from two separate large samples (total N > 15,000) were then randomly assigned to complete one version of each study. Effect sizes varied dramatically across different sets of materials designed to test the same hypothesis: materials from different teams renderedstatistically significant effects in opposite directions for four out of five hypotheses, with the narrowest range in estimates being d = -0.37 to +0.26. Meta-analysis and a Bayesian perspective on the results revealed overall support for two hypotheses, and a lack of support for three hypotheses. Overall, practically none of the variability in effect sizes was attributable to the skill of the research team in designing materials, while considerable variability was attributable to the hypothesis being tested. In a forecasting survey, predictions of other scientists were significantly correlated with study results, both across and within hypotheses. Crowdsourced testing of research hypotheses helps reveal the true consistency of empirical support for a scientific claim.</div