PERTANIKA JOURNAL OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

J

• Ahmi, A., & Nasir, M. H. M. (2019). Examining the trend of the research on eXtensible Business Reporting Language (XBRL): A bibliometric. International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 5(2), 1145-1167.

• Agarwal, A., Durairajanayagam, D., Tatagari, S., Esteves, S. C., Harlev, A., Henkel, R., Roychoudhury, S., Homa, S., Puchalt, N. G., Ramasamy, R., & Majzoub, A. (2016). Bibliometrics: Tracking research impact by selecting the appropriate metrics. Asian Journal of Andrology, 18(2), 296-309. https://doi.org/10.4103/1008-682X.171582

• Akiyama, Y. (2017). Learner beliefs and corrective feedback in telecollaboration: A longitudinal investigation. System, 64, 58-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2016.12.007

• Al-Qunayeer, H. S. (2019). Supporting postgraduates in research proposals through peer feedback in a Malaysian university. Journal of Further and Higher Education, 44(7), 956-970. https://doi.org/10.1080/0309877X.2019.1627299

• Arik, B. T., & Arik, E. (2017). Second language writing publications in Web of Science: A bibliometric analysis. Publications, 5(1), 4. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications5010004

• Brakel, V. L. (1990). The revising processes of sixth-grade writers with and without peer feedback. The Journal of Educational Research, 84(1), 22-29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220671.1990.10885987 

• Caputo, A., Marzi, G., Pellegrini, M. M., & Rialti, R. (2018). Conflict management in family businesses: A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review. International Journal of Conflict Management, 29(4), 519-542. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCMA-02-2018-0027

• Carless, D., & Boud, D. (2018). The development of student feedback literacy: Enabling uptake of feedback. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(8), 1315-1325. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2018.1463354

• Chang, Y. W., Huang, M. H., & Lin, C. W. (2015). Evolution of research subjects in library and information science based on keyword, bibliographical coupling, and co-citation analyses. Scientometrics, 105, 2071-2087. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1762-8

• Chen, T. (2014). Technology-supported peer feedback in ESL/EFL writing classes: A research synthesis. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(2), 365-397. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.960942 

• Chen, X., Chen, J., Wu, D., Xie, Y., & Li, J. (2016). Mapping the research trends by co-word analysis based on keywords from funded project. Procedia Computer Science, 91, 547-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2016.07.140

• Chen, X., Hao, J., Chen, J., Hua, S., & Hao, T. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of the research status of the technology enhanced language learning. In International Symposium on Emerging Technologies for Education (pp. 169-179). Springer.

• Cheng, L., & Yao, J. (2019, June). Bibliometric analysis of wearable devices and their applications to English education. In Proceedings of the 2019 International Conference on Modern Educational Technology (pp. 35-38). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3341042.3341059

• Chien, S.-Y., Hwang G.-J., & Jong, M. S.-Y. (2019). Effects of peer assessment within the context of spherical video-based virtual reality on EFL students’ English-speaking performance and learning perceptions. Computers & Education, 146, 103751. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2019.103751

• Cho, K., & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 328-338. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.006

• Cushing, A., Abbott, S., Lothian, D., Hall, A., & Westwood, O. M. R. (2011). Peer feedback as an aid to learning – What do we want? Feedback. When do we want it? Now! Medical Teacher, 33(2), e105-e112. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159x.2011.542522  

• de Bellis, N. (2009). Bibliometrics and citation analysis: From the science citation index to cybermetrics. Scarecrow Press.

• Dhawan, S. (2020). Online learning: A panacea in the time of COVID-19 crisis. Journal of Educational Technology Systems, 49(1), 5-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047239520934018

• Ding, Y., & Cronin, B. (2011). Popular and/or prestigious? Measures of scholarly esteem. Information Processing and Management, 47(1), 80-96. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm. 2010.01.002

• Dominick, P. G., Reilly, R. R., & Mcgourty, J. W. (1997). The effects of peer feedback on team member behavior. Group & Organization Management, 22(4), 508-520. https://doi.org/10.1177/1059601197224006  

• Dressler, R., Chu, M. W., Crossman, K., & Hilman, B. (2019). Quantity and quality of uptake: Examining surface and meaning-level feedback provided by peers and an instructor in a graduate research course. Assessing Writing, 39, 14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2018.11.001

• Durieux, V., & Gevenois, P. A. (2010). Bibliometric indicators: Quality measurements of scientific publication. Radiology, 255(2), 342-351. https://doi.org/10.1148/radiol.09090626

• Ertmer, P. A., Richardson, J. C., Belland, B., Camin, D., Connolly, P., Coulthard, G., Lei, K., & Mong, C. (2007). Using peer feedback to enhance the quality of student online postings: An exploratory study. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 12(2), 412-433. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1083-6101.2007.00331.x

• Ge, Z.-G. (2019). Exploring the effect of video feedback from unknown peers on e-learners’ English-Chinese translation performance. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1677721

• Gielen, S., Peeters, E., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Struyven, K. (2010a). Improving the effectiveness of peer feedback for learning. Learning and instruction, 20(4), 304-315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.007

• Gielen, S., Tops, L., Dochy, F., Onghena, P., & Smeets, S. (2010b). A comparative study of peer and teacher feedback and of various peer feedback forms in a secondary school writing curriculum. British Educational Research Journal, 36(1), 143-162. https://doi.org/10.1080/01411920902894070 

• Góngora-Orjuela, A. (2010). The importance of bibliometric studies. The Orinoquia case. ORINOQUIA, 14(2), 121-122. https://doi.org/10.22579/20112629.85

• Guardado, M., & Shi, L. (2007). ESL students’ experiences of online peer feedback. Computers and Composition, 24(4), 443-461. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2007.03.002 

• Gupta, I. (1988). Bibliometric research: Growth of biomedical literature. SBA Publications.

• Hovardas, T., Tsivitanidou, O. E., & Zacharia, Z. C. (2014). Peer versus expert feedback: An investigation of the quality of peer feedback among secondary school students. Computers & Education, 71, 133-152. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.09.019 

• Hsia, L.-H., Huang, I., & Hwang, G.-J. (2016). Effects of different online peer-feedback approaches on students’ performance skills, motivation and self-efficacy in a dance course. Computers & Education, 96, 55-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2016.02.004 

• Hu, J., & Zhang, Y. (2015). Research patterns and trends of Recommendation System in China using co-word analysis. Information Processing & Management, 51(4), 329-339. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ipm.2015.02.002

• Huang, L., Zhou, M., Lv, J., & Chen, K. (2020). Trends in global research in forest carbon sequestration: A bibliometric analysis. Journal of Cleaner Production, 252, 119908. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.119908

• Khodabandelou, R., Mehran, G., & Nimehchisalem, V. (2018). A bibliometric analysis of 21st century research trends in early childhood education. Revista Publicando, 5, 137-163.

• Kolle, S. R., Shettar, I., Kumar, V., & Parameshwar, G. S. (2018). Publication trends in literature on eBooks: A Scopus based bibliometric analysis. Collection and Curation, 37(3), 119-127. https://doi.org/10.1108/CC-07-2017-0027

• Kraus, S., Breier, M., & Dasí-Rodríguez, S. (2020). The art of crafting a systematic literature review in entrepreneurship research. International Entrepreneurship and Management Journal, 16(3), 1023-1042. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11365-020-00635-4

• Li, M., & Li, J. (2017). Online peer review using Turnitin in first-year writing classes. Computers and Composition, 46, 21-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compcom.2017.09.001

• Li, L., Liu, X., & Steckelberg, A. L. (2010). Assessor or assessee: How student learning improves by giving and receiving peer feedback. British Journal of Educational Technology, 41(3), 525-536. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2009.00968.x

• Lin, W. C., & Yang, S. C. (2011). Exploring students’ perceptions of integrating Wiki technology and peer feedback into English writing courses. English Teaching: Practice and Critique, 10(2), 88-103. http://education.waikato.ac.nz/research/files/etpc/files/2011v10n2dial1.pdf

• Liu, M. H. (2016). Blending a class video blog to optimize student learning outcomes in higher education. Internet and Higher Education, 30, 44-53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.03.001

• Liu, N.-F., & Carless, D. (2006). Peer feedback: The learning element of peer assessment. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(3), 279-290. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510600680582

• Ma, Y., Dong, M., Zhou, K., Mita, C., Liu, J., & Wayne, P. M. (2016). Publication trends in acupuncture research: A 20-year bibliometric analysis based on PubMed. PloS one, 11(12), e0168123. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0168123

• Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., & Altman, D. G. (2010). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. International Journal of Surgery, 8(5), 336-341. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijsu.2010.02.007

• 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

• Montero-Fleta, B., Pérez-Sabater, C., & Pérez-Sabater, M. L. (2015). Microblogging and blended learning: Peer response in tertiary education. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 191, 1590-1595. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.04.384 

• Mulder, R. A., Pearce, J. M., & Baik, C. (2014). Peer review in higher education: Student perceptions before and after participation. Active Learning in Higher Education, 15(2), 157-171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1469787414527391

• Muritala, B. A., Sánchez-Rebull, M. V., & Hernández-Lara, A. B. (2020). A bibliometric analysis of online reviews research in tourism and hospitality. Sustainability, 12(23), 9977. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12239977

• Nelson, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). The nature of feedback: How different types of peer feedback affect writing performance. Instructional Science, 37(4), 375-401. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-008-9053-x

• Nicol, D., Thomson, A., & Breslin, C. (2014). Rethinking feedback practices in higher education: A peer review perspective. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 39(1), 102-122. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2013.795518

• Nilson, L. B. (2003). Improving student peer feedback. College Teaching, 51(1), 34-38. https://doi.org/10.1080/87567550309596408

• Noroozi, O., & Hatami, J. (2019) The effects of online peer feedback and epistemic beliefs on students’ argumentation-based learning. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 56(5), 548-557. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2018.1431143

• Özdağoğlu, A., Özdağoğlu, G., Topoyan, M., & Damar, M. (2019). A predictive filtering approach for clarifying bibliometric datasets: An example on the research articles related to industry 4.0. Technology Analysis & Strategic Management, 32(2), 158-174. https://doi.org/10.1080/09537325.2019.1645826 

• Patchan, M. M., & Schunn, C. D. (2015). Understanding the benefits of providing peer feedback: How students respond to peers’ texts of varying quality. Instructional Science, 43(5), 591-614. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11251-015-9353-x 

• Patri, M. (2002). The influence of peer feedback on self- and peer-assessment of oral skills. Language Testing, 19(2), 109-131. https://doi.org/10.1191/0265532202lt224oa 

• Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., & Kirschner, P. A. (2010). Awareness of group performance in a CSCL-environment: Effects of peer feedback and reflection. Computers in Human Behavior, 26(2), 151-161. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2009.10.011 

• Phielix, C., Prins, F. J., Kirschner, P. A., Erkens, G., & Jaspers, J. (2011). Group awareness of social and cognitive performance in a CSCL environment: Effects of a peer feedback and reflection tool. Computers in Human Behavior, 27(3), 1087-1102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2010.06.024 

• Qing, M. (2019). Examining the role of inter-group peer online feedback on wiki writing in an EAP context. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 33(3), 197-216. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2018.1556703

• Rialti, R., Marzi, G., Ciappei, C., & Busso, D. (2019). Big data and dynamic capabilities: A bibliometric analysis and systematic literature review. Management Decision, 57(8), 2052-2068. https://doi.org/10.1108/MD-07-2018-0821

• Rodríguez-Jiménez, C., Sanz-Prieto, M., & Alonso-García, S. (2019). Technology and higher education: A bibliometric analysis. Education Sciences, 9(3), 169. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030169

• Shang, H.-F. (2019). Exploring online peer feedback and automated corrective feedback on EFL writing performance. Interactive Learning Environments, 1-13. https://doi.org/10.1080/10494820.2019.1629601

• Sheen, Y. (2008). Recasts, language anxiety, modified output, and L2 learning. Language Learning, 58(4), 835-874. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9922.2008.00480.x

• Sinkovics, R. R., & Sinkovics, N. (2016). Enhancing the foundations for theorising through bibliometric mapping. International Marketing Review, 33(3), 327-350.  https://doi.org/10.1108/IMR-10-2014-0341

• Sivarajah, U., Kamal, M. M., Irani, Z., & Weerakkody, V. (2017). Critical analysis of Big Data challenges and analytical methods. Journal of Business Research, 70, 263-286. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2016.08.001

• Strake, E., & Kumar, V. (2010). Feedback and self-regulated learning: Insights from supervisors’ and PHD examiners reports. Reflective Practises, 11(1), 19-32. https://doi.org/10.1080/14623940903525140

• Strijbos, J. W., Narciss, S., & Dünnebier, K. (2010). Peer feedback content and sender’s competence level in academic writing revision tasks: Are they critical for feedback perceptions and efficiency? Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 291-303. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.008

• Sweileh, W. M. (2018). Research trends on human trafficking: A bibliometric analysis using Scopus database. Global Health, 14, 106. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12992-018-0427-9

• Sweileh, W. M. (2020). Bibliometric analysis of global scientific literature on vaccine hesitancy in peer-reviewed journals (1990-2019). BMC Public Health, 20(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-09368-z

• Tian, X., Geng, Y., Sarkis, J., Zhong, S., (2018). Trends and features of embodied flows associated with international trade based on bibliometric analysis. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 31, 148-157. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.01.002

• Tseng, S. C., & Tsai, C. C. (2007). On-line peer assessment and the role of the peer feedback: A study of high school computer course. Computers & Education, 49(4), 1161-1174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2006.01.007

• Van den Berg, I., Admiraal, W., & Pilot, A. (2006). Designing student peer assessment in higher education: Analysis of written and oral peer feedback. Teaching in Higher Education, 11(2), 135-147. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510500527685 

• Van den Boom, G., Paas, F., & van Merriënboer, J. J. G. (2007). Effects of elicited reflections combined with tutor or peer feedback on self-regulated learning and learning outcomes. Learning and Instruction, 17(5), 532-548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2007.09.003 

• Van der Pol, J., van den Berg, B. A. M., Admiraal, W. F., & Simons, P. R. J. (2008). The nature, reception, and use of online peer feedback in higher education. Computers & Education, 51(4), 1804-1817. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2008.06.001 

• Van Eck, N. J., & Waltman, L. (2010). Software survey: VOSviewer, a computer program for bibliometric mapping. Scientometrics, 84(2), 523-538. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-009-0146-3

• Van Popta, E., Kral, M., Camp, G., Martens, R. L., & Simons, P. R.-J. (2017). Exploring the value of peer feedback in online learning for the provider. Educational Research Review, 20, 24-34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2016.10.003

• Van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., & Van den Bergh, H. (2010). The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction, 20(4), 316-327. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2009.08.009 

• Vorobel, O., & Kim, D. (2017). Adolescent ELLs’ collaborative writing practices in face-to-face and online contexts: From perceptions to action. System, 65, 78-89. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2017.01.008

• Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. In L. S. Vygotsky & M. Cole (Eds.), Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (pp. 79-91.). Harvard University Press.

• Ware, P., & O’Dowd, R. (2008). Peer feedback on language form in telecollaboration. Language Learning & Technology, 12(1), 43-63.

• Wu, W.-C. V., Petit, E., & Chen, C.-H. (2015). EFL writing revision with blind expert and peer review using a CMC open forum. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 28(1), 58-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2014.937442

• Wu, Z. (2019). Lower English proficiency means poorer feedback performance? A mixed-methods study. Assessing Writing, 41, 14-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.05.001

• Xie, K. (2012). What do the numbers say? The influence of motivation and peer feedback on students’ behaviour in online discussions. British Journal of Educational Technology, 44(2), 288-301. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8535.2012.01291.x 

• Xie, Y., Ke, F., & Sharma, P. (2008). The effect of peer feedback for blogging on college students’ reflective learning processes. The Internet and Higher Education, 11(1), 18-25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.iheduc.2007.11.001

• Yang, Y.-F. (2015). Transforming and constructing academic knowledge through online peer feedback in summary writing. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 29(4), 683-702. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2015.1016440 

• Young, H., & Belanger, T. (1983). The ALA glossary of library and information science. American Library Association.

• Yu, S. (2019). Learning from giving peer feedback on postgraduate theses: Voices from Master’s students in the Macau EFL context. Assessing Writing, 40, 42-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asw.2019.03.004

• Yu, F. Y., & Wu, C. P. (2013). Predictive effects of online peer feedback types on performance quality. Journal of Educational Technology & Society, 16(1), 332-341. https://www.jstor.org/stable/jeductechsoci.16.1.332

• Zhang, S. (1995). Reexamining the affective advantage of peer feedback in the ESL writing class. Journal of Second Language Writing, 4(3), 209-222. https://doi.org/10.1016/1060-3743(95)90010-1

• 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

• Zheng, L., Cui, P., Li, X., & Huang, R. (2017). Synchronous discussion between assessors and assessees in web-based peer assessment: Impact on writing performance, feedback quality, meta-cognitive awareness and self-efficacy. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 43(3), 500-514. https://doi.org/10.1080/02602938.2017.1370533

• Zupic, I., & Čater, T. (2015). Bibliometric methods in management and organization. Organizational Research Methods, 18(3), 429-472. https://doi.org/10.1177/1094428114562629