People’s Democratic Republic of Algeria

Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

Larbi Ben M’hidi University-Oum El Bouaghi

Faculty of Letters and Languages

Analysing Algerian EFL Scientific Articles in Scopus and

Algerian Scientific Journal Platform: A Bibliometric and

Comparative Study

Department of English

A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Fulfilment of the Requirements for the Degree

of Master in Language Sciences and Teaching English as a Foreign language

Submitted By:

Miss Meriem HAFSI Miss Samia OUADFEL

https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0755-7990 https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2966-6602

Supervisor:
Dr. Hadj BOURI. https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8731-419X
Members of the jury:

President of the jury: Examiner:

2020-2021
 Dedication
Every challenging work needs efforts as well as guidance and support from those who
are close to our heart

I would love to dedicate my humble effort;

To Allah my Creator

To my beloved parents, the reason of what I became today, thanks for your endless
love, support, prayers and encouragement

To my amazing dad “Said” who thought me to believe in myself and supported me. I
am so grateful to be your daughter.

To my lovely mom “Djebina”, the heart of the family, who believed in me and have
always been my anchor.

To my sweet sister “Selsabil” who have been the light in my darkness.

To my dearest brothers “Abdelhedi, Abdesamad, Abderraouf” who made me stronger,

you are my superheroes.

To my partner Samia who have been patient, caring and hard worker

To my second family Asma, Imen Houda, Khalissa, Khadidja and farah

To the adorable Rym KHOUACHI who have been always there to motivate me

To my Best friends Ahlem, Djihen, Hanen, Meryem, Narimen, Randa and Rania,
thank you for the moral support and tolerance

To those who love me unconditionally “Meriem HAFSI”.

 Dedication

I would like to dedicate my humble effort;

To Allah my Creator

A special feeling of gratitude to my loving parents, "may God bless them "whose words
of encouragement and push for tenacity ring in my ears.

My brothers, my sisters who have supported me throughout the process.

My nephews, birds of Heaven "King Haroun, Abd- Errahim, Akram, Zina, Seif -Eddin,
Louay, Mouataz, Lokman, Baby Nour, Jouri, my beloved Farah "….you are house
candles.

Brothers in law.

Daughters in law.

To my dear companion Meriem the journey has begun.

To all my friends who supported me to be here.

A special thanks to my colleagues in the English Department, especially

“Souhila”

For everyone who let me down, this is the beginning.

To me “Samia OUADFEL”
 Acknowledgements

First and foremost, we would like praise and thank God, the almighty, who

granted countless blessing, knowledge, and strength to accomplish this work.

We would like to express our sincere gratitude and appreciation to our

supervisor Dr. Hadj BOURI for his enthusiasm for the project, his support,

encouragement, patience, and whose insight and knowledge into the subject matter

steered us through this research.

Special thanks are extended to Mr. Djamel MEZRAG for his constructive

comments and precious time in giving the guidance and suggestions for the

improvement of this work.

We would also thank Mr. Salah AID and Dr. Haroun MELGANI for

providing us with valuable advice concerning the topics.

Last but not least, thanks are due to Dr. IDRISSI Samir may God reward

you with all the best for the kindness of your heart and constant encouragement, and

Dr. ADAD Radhia you were the best mate. Thank you for the support.
 Abstract

As a result of the technological development over the years, it has become possible for

researchers to publish all kinds of information via the internet. Bibliometric methods

now form an intrinsic element of the research assessment process, notably in the

disciplines of science application. This study aims to conduct a bibliometric analysis of

the articles about Algerian EFL scientific articles in Scopus and ASJP databases. The

purpose of this study is to examine the characteristics of the most-cited educational

research published on the topic of EFL, and to make a comparison between the two

databases using VOSviewer tool. The current study, thus, aims to report a bibliometric

analysis of 23 articles on EFL obtained from Scopus and ASJP databases. To carry out

the analysis, a qualitative method was performed for the most used keywords, the most

cited countries, the collaborative authors, and the most cited references. According to

the results, Scopus revealed (Algeria, E-learning) as the most used keywords; (Algeria)

as the most cited country; (Djoudi. M, Zidat. S) as the collaborative authors;

(Brantmeier. C; Does Gender Make A Difference?) as the most cited reference. Then,

ASJP revealed (Algerian, EFL) as most used keywords; (Algeria) as the most cited

country; (Antir. R) as the collaborative authors; (Alkahtani, S Teaching Esl Reading

Using Computers) as the most cited reference. It is assumed that the results obtained

would provide the researchers with a general framework in this field. Suggestions for

further studies are brought in as a result of the study.

 List of Abbreviations

ANSI American National Standards Institute

ASJP Algerian Scientific Journal Platform

CERIST Centre de Recherche sur l’Information Scientifique et Technique

CSV Comma-separated values

CWTS Centre for Science and Technology Studies

EFL English as a Foreign Language

GS Google Scholar

MA Microsoft Academic

SNDL System National de Documentation en Ligne

WoS Web of Science

 List of Figures

Figure 1- 1 Bradford zones............................................................................................ 31

Figure 2- 1 AIMRaD: the hourglass ‘‘shape’’ of a generic scientific research............. 35

Figure 2- 2 Template for the discussion........................................................................38

Figure 0- 1 Network Visualization of Authors’ Collaboration / Co-Authorship related

to EFL Algerian.............................................................................................................. 55

Figure 0- 2 Network visualization of the Collaborative Countries/ Co- Authorship

related to EFL Algeria.................................................................................................... 56

Figure 0- 3 Network visualization of all keywords/ co-occurrence related to EFL

Algerian.......................................................................................................................... 60

Figure 0- 4 Network visualization of the cited references / co-citation related to EFL

Algerian.......................................................................................................................... 63

Figure 0- 5 Network visualization of authors’ collaboration / co-authorship related to

EFL Algerian.................................................................................................................. 65

Figure 0- 6 Network visualization of the collaborative countries/ co-authorship related

to EFL Algerian.............................................................................................................. 67

Figure 0- 7 Network visualization of all keywords/ co-occurrence related to EFL

Algerian.......................................................................................................................... 70

Figure 0- 8 Network Visualization of the Cited References / Co-Citation related to EFL

Algerian.......................................................................................................................... 73
 List of Tables

Table 1- 1 Fundamental Laws of Bibliometric Analysis............................................... 29

Table 1- 2 Variables Involved in Lotka’s, Bradford’s and Zipf’s Laws........................ 32

Table 0- 1 Co-Authorship the Most Collaborative Authors ranked by the Number of

Total Link Strength related to EFL Algerian..................................................................53

Table 0- 2 Co-Authorship the Most Collaborative Countries ranked by the Number of

Total Link Strength related to EFL Algerian..................................................................55

Table 0- 3 Co-Occurrence of all keywords related to EFL Algerian............................. 57

Table 0- 4 Co-Citation of Cited References related to EFL Algerian............................60

Table 0- 5 Co-Authorship. The Most Collaborative Authors Ranked by the Number of

Total Link Strength.........................................................................................................63

Table 0- 6 Co-Authorship. The Most Collaborative Countries Ranked by the Number

of Total Link Strength related to EFL Algerian............................................................. 65

Table 0- 7 Co-Occurrence of all keywords Related to EFL Algerian............................67

Table 0- 8 Co-Citation of Cited References related to EFL Algerian............................71

 Table of Contents

GENERAL INTRODUCTION....................................................................................21

1. Background to the Study........................................................................................... 21

2. Statement of the Problem...........................................................................................22

3. Research Aims........................................................................................................... 22

4. Research Questions....................................................................................................22

5. Research Hypothesis..................................................................................................23

6. Research Methodology.............................................................................................. 23

6.1. Corpus.............................................................................................................. 23

6.2. Method..............................................................................................................23

7. Significance of the Study..........................................................................................23

8. Structure of the Study............................................................................................... 24

CHAPTER ONE: THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK............................................... 26

Introduction.....................................................................................................................26

1. Bibliometrics..............................................................................................................26

1.1. Historical Background............................................................................................ 26

1.2. What is Bibliometrics?........................................................................................... 27

1.3. Scope of the Bibliometric Study.............................................................................28

1.3.1. Descriptive studies....................................................................................... 28

1.3.2. Behavioural studies...................................................................................... 28

1.4. Bibliometric laws....................................................................................................28

1.4.1. Lotka’s Law..................................................................................................30

 1.4.2. Bradford’s law..............................................................................................30

1.4.3. Zipf’s law..................................................................................................... 31

1.5. Common feature of Lotka’s, Bradford’s laws, and Zipf’s law...............................31

1.6. Implementations of bibliometrics........................................................................... 32

2. Algerian EFL Scientific Articles............................................................................... 33

2.1. Scientific Articles................................................................................................... 33

2.2. Structure of Scientific Articles............................................................................... 33

2.2.1. AIMReDCaR Structure................................................................................ 33

2.3. Research and Publication Ethics.............................................................................40

2.3.1. Research Ethics............................................................................................ 40

2.3.2. Publication Ethics.........................................................................................41

2.4. Working with Journals............................................................................................42

2.5. Algerian EFL Articles.............................................................................................42

3. Scientific Platforms (Databases)................................................................................42

3.1. Algerian Scientific Journal Platform (ASJP)..........................................................43

.3.2. System National de Documentation en Ligne (SNDL)......................................... 44

3.3. Elsevier................................................................................................................... 44

3.3.1. ScienceDirect............................................................................................45

3.3.2. Scopus.......................................................................................................45

3.3.3. Mendeley.................................................................................................. 46

3.3.4. SSRN........................................................................................................ 46
3.4. Web of Science (WoS).......................................................................................... 46

3.5. Google Scholar (GS)..............................................................................................47

3.6. Microsoft Academic (MA).................................................................................... 47

3.7. Dimensions............................................................................................................ 48

Conclusion...................................................................................................................... 48

CHAPTER TWO: FIELDWORK.............................................................................. 49

Introduction.....................................................................................................................49

1. Research Methodology.............................................................................................. 49

1.1. Selection of Research Subjects...............................................................................49

1.2. Data collection........................................................................................................ 50

1.3. Method and Tools................................................................................................... 50

1.4. Data analysis and Procedures................................................................................. 51

2. Research results........................................................................................................ 52

2.1. Scopus.....................................................................................................................52

2.1.1. Theme 1: co-authorship................................................................................52

2.1.1.1. Authors............................................................................................. 53

2.1.1.2. Countries.......................................................................................... 55

2.1.2. Theme 2: co-occurrence............................................................................... 56

2.1.3. Theme 3: co-citation.....................................................................................60

2.2. ASJP...................................................................................................................... 63

2.2.1. Theme 1: co-authorship.................................................................................63

 2.2.2. Theme 2: co-occurrence............................................................................... 67

2.2.3. Theme 3: co-citation.....................................................................................70

2.3. Comparative analysis.............................................................................................73

Conclusion...................................................................................................................... 73

GENERAL CONCLUSION........................................................................................ 74

1. Summary of the Results.............................................................................................74

2. Pedagogical Implications...........................................................................................75

3. Limitations of the study............................................................................................. 75

4. Suggestions for Further Research..............................................................................76

References.......................................................................................................................79
 GENERAL INTRODUCTION

1. Background to the Study

Academic writing is a formal piece of paper written to report a research that has

been conducted. Today, most scientific articles around the world are published in

English; however, this can be a challenge especially for non-native English writers. In

Algeria, due to the rapid diffusion of English, many scholars attempt to write scientific

researches in that language. In fact, out of 1,410 national projects published in Algeria

between, 1998 and 2003, 681 (48%) were published in English, followed by French

with 528 (37%) (Slougui, 2009). It is worth noting, that these numbers show that

Algerian scientists use the English language to publish the most professionally.

After publishing an article, it is important to know its impact and influence in

the research field, this is done to allow researchers to make rapid and more

knowledgeable decisions about research trends. Bibliometrics provides the ability to

analyse the productivity of journals, authors etc. It was first coined by Pritchard (1969),

he defined the term as the statistical and mathematical analysis of books, articles,

journals, and authors. It was mainly related to natural science; thus, today it is used for

other disciplines such as language. Several databases such as Scopus, WoS, GS, and

others offer the bibliometric analysis.

Various studies have assessed the overlap across databases and the influence of

using different data sources for specific research disciplines on bibliometric indicators.

For instance: Mongeon (2016), Bosman et al. (2006), Martín-martín et al. (2018), Jacso

(2005), and Norris and Oppenheim (2007) compared the general characteristics and

coverage of the databases; other researches compared the bibliometric rankings

obtained. However, no single bibliometric study has been conducted on ASJP database

although it contains a significant number of articles.

2. Statement of the Problem

Bibliometric studies allow researchers to examine the quality and quantity of

work done by scientists in several fields.

Up to now, rarely studies has been conducted either about the Algerian

scientists writing about EFL in their articles or about the ASJP platform. This informs

the problem statement and the motivations for conducting this study.

3. Research Aims

This study is a bibliometric and a comparative analysis of Algerian EFL

Scientific articles published in Scopus and ASJP. The primary aim of this paper is to

critically evaluate the productivity of Algerian researchers. Therefore, its main

objectives are the following:

1. To analyse the Algerian EFL scientific articles published in both Scopus and ASJP

2. To explore the validity of Scopus and ASJP for Algerian EFL scientists

3. To compare between the productivity of both Scopus and ASJP

4. Research Questions

The study sought to answer the following specific research questions:

Which keywords do authors on EFL area of research use the most frequently?

Which countries contributed most to the publication?

Who are the most cited authors in EFL area of research?

Which one of the databases is more productive Scopus or ASJP?

To what extent are Scopus and ASJP valid for Algerian EFL scientists?

5. Research Hypothesis

The hypothesis that will be tested is that:

6. Research Methodology

6.1. Corpus

The scientific articles of Algerian EFL scientists published in Scopus and

Algerian scientific platform are the target sample of this study. The corpus of this

research comprises 14 articles from ASJP and 9 articles from Scopus.

6.2. Method

To achieve the objective of our research, a quantitative method was chosen as

the main procedure via the use of the bibliometric analysis method. The scientific

articles published by Algerian EFL scientists were exported from Scopus and ASJP

database. The focus was to identify the productivity of Algerian researchers in each

database and making a comparison between the two platforms.

The articles chosen for the study contained journal, title, author, keywords, and counts

of citation, were transformed into Comma-separated values (CSV) format. VOSviewer

(version 1.6.16) was used to analyse the Co-authorship, Co-occurrence, and Co-citation.

It was developed by the Centre for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS) at Leiden

University (The Netherlands).

7. Significance of the Study

8. Structure of the Study

Following the general introductory section, the study consists of two themed

chapters.

Chapter one, the theoretical framework, first gives a brief overview of the

history and most important aspects of bibliometric method. This Followed by a detailed

overview of the key notions, concepts of scientific articles, and EFL Algerian scientists.

In addition to that, a section to mention and define the most popular scientific platforms.

Only then, the chapter closes with a conclusion.

Chapter two, The fieldwork, accounts for the practical procedure of data

collection, methods of analysis, discussion of the findings, and interpretation of the

results. Finally, the study closes with the summary, limitations, and recommendations

for further pedagogical implication.

 CHAPTER ONE: THEORITICAL FRAMEWORK

Introduction

In prefacing this chapter, it is important to note that the main aim covered is to

offer a bibliometric analysis of Algerian articles published in two different platforms;

Scopus and ASJP. In doing so, the chapter is divided into three distinct sections. The

first section will examine the history, the definitions, and the Laws of bibliometric

analysis. In the section that follows, it will deal with EFL Algerian scientific articles.

The last section will present different platforms including Scopus and ASJP. To close

up, the chapter will end with a summarizing conclusion.

1. Bibliometrics

1.1. Historical Background

The study of scientific literature has a rich history that goes back to the early

decades of the past century. However, it was until 1969 that Pritchard first coined the

term Bibliometrics in print. It was defined as the “application of mathematical and

statistical methods to books and other media of communication” (Pritchard, 1969).

Wilson (1995) contends that the word "bibliometrics" has a French precedent derived

from the term "bibliometrie". To back up Wilson's claim, it was discovered that a

French scholar, (Otlet, 1934), had previously used the expression "bibliometrie" for

similar research. The historical foundation and development of bibliometrics is rooted

in statistics and bibliography. Statistical analysis of bibliography is noted to pay

particular care to the development of the laws and procedures in bibliometrics (Hertzel,

1987).

A pioneering example of bibliometric research was a 'statistical analysis of the

literature' of comparative anatomy from 1543 to 1860, which counted the number of
titles, both books and journal articles, and grouped them by country of origin within

periods. The second study by Hulme in 1923 entitled "Statistical Analysis of the history

of science" was mainly about the initial entries of the "English International Catalogue

of Scientific Literature" Shanmugam (2018). Gross & Gross (1927) made another

pioneering study; they used the citation analysis method to articles in the journal of the

American Chemical Society. This work has had significant consequences, as citation

analysis is now one of the most important fields of bibliometrics. Furthermore,

Bradford (1934) added a key study on the distribution and Lubrication research. He

found the theoretical foundation of the Bibliometrics study known as the Bradford’s

Law of Scattering.

1.2. What is Bibliometrics?

Many scholars have defined the term bibliometrics in various ways. Brookes

(1990) maintains that bibliometrics must be conceded to Library and Information

Studies only since its work is yet to end as libraries continue to acclimatize to the

“changing world around them…bibliometrics itself needs the continued interest of

outside experts, statisticians and others, in developing and refining its techniques”.

Bibliometrics, which is sometimes interchanged with the term ‘scientometrics’ is a

“research technique in library and information science that applies quantitative analysis

and statistics to describe publication patterns in any field of knowledge” (Agyeman &

Bilson, 2015)

The term Bibliometrics can be divided into two sub-terms: Biblio; which means

information, and Metrics, which stands for measuring; means explaining the world

through measurement. However, many scholars, including Raising, Fairthorne, Beck,

Potter, Sengupta, Pritchard, and others, described the term bibliometric differently.
 Raisig (1962) defines bibliometrics as the assembling and interpretation of

statistics relating to books and publications ...to demonstrate historical movements, to

determine national and universal research, use of books and journals and to ascertain in

many local situations the general use of books and journals.

Fairthorne (1969) goes on with a brief though comprehensive definition.

According to him, bibliometrics is "the quantitative treatment of properties of recorded

discourse and behaviour appertaining to it". Similarly, Pritchard (1969) defined

bibliometrics as the mathematical methods applied to books and other forms of

communication.

Even though the definition of bibliometrics varies among researchers, yet we

can conclude that it is an important tool to make a descriptive study. Bibliometrics can

be extended to any subject field and the majority of document-related issues.

1.3. Scope of the Bibliometric Study

Bibliometric study can be categorized into two: Descriptive studies and

Behavioural studies. (Mathankar, 2018)

1.3.1. Descriptive studies

Descriptive studies cover those that highlight a distinguishing feature of

documents or literature. Descriptive studies brings out Time and frequency of studies,

Quantity of information, Nature of Information etc.

1.3.2. Behavioural studies

Behavioural studies are those that investigate the relationship between several

components such as Authorship, Frequency of publication, Citations etc.

1.4. Bibliometric laws

 Bibliometric analysis have three popular laws: Lotka’s Law, Bradford’s Law,

and Zipf’s Law. These laws can be found in Table 1 where it is evident that

bibliometric analysis has axes regarded as experimental predictors (Waltman & Noyons,

2018).

Table 1- 1
Fundamental Laws of Bibliometric Analysis

Laws and principles Study focus Major applications

Bradford Law Journals Estimate the validity of journals

Lotka’s Law Researchers Estimating the degree of

researchers
Zipf Law Word Automatic indexing of scientific
and technological articles

Hoffman’s Law Word Automatic indexing of scientific

and technological articles

Unknown universities Citation Determining the elite researchers

Immediate factor or effect Citation Estimating the degree of scientific

journals, especially in the field of
knowledge
Bibliographic correlation Citation Estimate the degree of correlation
between two or more articles

Share a citation Citation Estimate the degree of correlation

between two or more articles

Literature Citation Estimate the coming down in

research in a specific area of
knowledge
Half-life Citation A half-life estimate for the
research unit of theoretical
literature in a particular cognitive
field
The epidemic theory of Citation Estimating the growth and decline
Hoffman rates of research in a specific
knowledge area
Elitism Law Citation Estimating the elite size for a
specific community of researchers
Forward search Requiring Defining the normative
relationship between multiple
researchers quoting one another
Base 20/80 Information Create, expand and downgrade
research groups

Note. Brika, S. K. M., Algamdi, A., Chergui, K., Musa, A. A., & Zouaghi, R. (2021,

May)

1.4.1. Lotka’s Law

Alfred J. Lotka 1926 examined author productivity patterns ‘Authorship’ and

coined one of the fundamental laws of bibliometrics (Andres, 2009). He noticed that in

a given field of research many authors publish only one study, while a small group of

prominent authors contributes to a significant number of publication. This proem is the

basis of Lotka’s law, also known as the inverse square law on author productivity.

According to this inverse square law, the number of authors who contributed to a

particular study is used to estimate how many authors would have published x studies.

In conclusion, the number of authors who produce x studies is proportional to 1/x2.

1.4.2. Bradford’s law

Samuel Clement Bradford 1934 was the founder of Bradford’s law, one of the

important laws of bibliometrics (Andres, 2009, p. 31). His work in geophysics was

established between 1931 and 1933, during which time he collected all the articles he

could find related to the topic. As he analysed the journals where the articles were

published, he found a regularity, namely an inverse relationship between the number of

articles published in a subject field and the number of journals in which they appear.

This means that a small number of journals account for a sizable portion of overall

publications in a given subject area, while a growing number of journals publish fewer

papers in that area. In brief, Bradford’s law ranks journals according to their
productivity are ranked and divided into groups or categories, depending on the number

of articles they account for. These groups are termed Bradford zones (Figure 1).

Figure 1- 1
Bradford zones

Core
Zone 1
Zone 2

Note. (Andres, 2009, p. 32)

From figure 1, the core is where you find the most productive journal. Each

time we move from one zone to the next one the productivity decreases and so on.

1.4.3. Zipf’s law

Zipf’s law was supposed to be applied to recorded discourse; it was used in a

social science fields such as linguistics. Zipf asserted that if one takes the words making

up an extended body of text and ranks them by frequency of occurrence, then the rank

of words multiplied by their frequency of occurrence will be approximately constant

(Andres, 2009). This law subsequently verified by Hanley (1937), who analysed the

frequency of occurrence of the words in James Joyce’s novel Ulysses.

1.5. Common feature of Lotka’s, Bradford’s laws, and Zipf’s law

 Up to this point, we have looked at the core empirical laws of information

science: Lotka's law of author productivity, Bradford's law of journal productivity

scatter, and Zipf's law of recorded discourse. (Chen & Leimkuhler, 1986) illustrated

that Lotka’s, Bradford’s and Zipf’s laws have something in common, and even claimed

that they were mathematically equivalent. Based on their saying, we can notice that all

three laws relate, via a simple function, two variables. They found out two main

characteristics shared by the three laws. The first is that all three study the particular

arrangement of two groups: the observation and the class (Hubert, 1981). The variables

involved will be the difference between these laws (Table 2) .The second common

characteristic they all involve a relatively simple model of the particular arrangement of

the observation-class groups.

Table 1- 2
Variables Involved in Lotka’s, Bradford’s and Zipf’s Laws

Observation Class

Lotka Papers Author

Bradford Papers Journal

Zipf Word occurrences Word

Note. (Andres, 2009, p. 39)

From Table 2, it is clear that the three laws drop into two groups (Observation

and Class) with different variables.

1.6. Implementations of bibliometrics

The implementation of bibliometric research reveals citation patterns as well as

the different types of information resources used by scholars in a field of study.

Bibliometric analysis help in the identification of publication patterns, authorship

citations as well as coverage of works in relation to geographical patterns (Hazarika et

al., 2003), it has become an essential tool for assessing and analysing the productivity

and impact of academics and technology. Knowing the productivity and efficiency of

information resources in a particular area facilitates the planning and provision of

resources to meet the needs of the users.

2. Algerian EFL Scientific Articles

‘‘What is written without effort is in general read without pleasure.’’

Samuel Johnson (1709–1784)

2.1. Scientific Articles

Scientific articles are the ‘warehouse’ for scientific investigation and the

processes employed for making research. They are written in order to uncover some

truth and to give scientists a way to discuss the outcomes of their research. The media

(manuscripts) must have a defined framework to make communication successful,

allowing the author to express his discoveries and insights in an ordered, logical way.

There are two distinct types of scientific papers Pardede (2012). Complete

research papers which are based on actual and relevant studies, and concept papers that

do not present new information from fresh research but instead discuss and compare

selectively the results of other researchers (through studies of library) to advance

thinking in the field of interest. This study focuses on complete research publications,

particularly in English.

2.2. Structure of Scientific Articles

2.2.1. AIMReDCaR Structure

AIMReDCaR (the Abstract, the Introduction, the Materials and Methods, the

Results the Discussion, the Conclusion, and the References) is a famous format of
scientific papers. Pardede (2012, p. 2) claims that the application of the format

AIMReDCaR rigidizes the structure of scientific papers and there are two explanations.

Firstly, scientific publications must be standardized to enable communication in the

community of scientists of scientific results, and secondly, by this format, it is possible

to read the material at various levels. In brief, the scientific format ensures that a reader

is aware of what to expect and what to find in particular categories of content. Cargill

and O’Connor (2009, p. 10) showed the AIMRaD (Abstract, Introduction, Results,

Discussion, Methods and materials) structure and what it can tell us about English-

language research articles in figure 2. The diagram shows something crucial about

scientific publications by their width and form rather than depth. It shows the

component and importance of each section in the AIMRaD structure. Cargill and

O’Connor first started by explaining the Results where every part of the article must be

related to. Moving to the Introduction which starts with a general idea that must be

presented in an attractive way, and ends with stating the aim of the work. After the

introduction and before it ends, the writer have to mention the background and the

previous studies related to his study and relevant to the problem. Following this section,

the Method is needed to clarify how the results are obtained. Finally, the Discussion of

the results.
Figure 2- 1
AIMRaD: the hourglass ‘‘shape’’ of a generic scientific research

(a) The whole structure is governed by the Results

box; everything in the article must relate to and be

connected with the data and analysis presented in

the Results section.

(b)(1) The Introduction begins with a broad focus.

The starting point you select for your Introduction

should be one that attracts the lively interest of the

audience you are aiming to address: the

international readers of your target journal.

(3) The Introduction ends with a focus exactly

parallel to that of the Results; often this is a

statement of the aim or purpose of the work

presented in the paper, or its principal findings or

activity.

(2) Between these two points, background

information and previous work are woven together

to logically connect the relevant problem with the

Note. Cargill and O’Connor (2009, p. 10)

Figure 2 gives a summary of the important parts of an article. However, it is not

a standard structure; each writer follow a certain structure model.

From what was mentioned above, the seven parts and their main elements of the

AIMReDCaR format are explained one by one in the following sections.

 2.2.1.1. Abstract. An abstract is a short but comprehensive summary of

the main ideas and results of a paper. The ANSI defines it as “an abbreviated, accurate

representation of the contents of a document, preferably prepared by its author(s) for

publication with it” (ANSI 1979, p 1). Most articles begin with an abstract that is

limited to 150 to 250 words. It provides maximum details with minimum words. A

good abstract provides a brief description of the main ideas and findings of the paper. It

also gives examples of the various steps involved in the paper's development. (Peat,

2002) explains that:

To ensure that the abstract contains all of the necessary information, many

journals now require that you structure your abstract formally. The BMJ

suggests objectives, design, setting, participants, main outcome measures,

results, and conclusions as the subheadings of its structured abstracts. Other

journals, particularly journals that publish both clinical and laboratory studies,

limit their abstract headings to the standard aims, methods, results, and

conclusions. Even if the journal does not specify any subheadings, write your

abstract as though they were there. (p. 49)

Peat (2002) claims that many journals recommend writing the abstract in a formal way.

The formal way of an abstract means to mention the most important parts (Design,

Aims, Method, Results).This to guarantee that your abstract is well done and comprises

all the information. Moreover, he advice to write with the subheadings (Objective,

Aims, Results…) even if they were not required.

At the end of an abstract, many journals ask the author to provide a short phrase

or three to five key words for indexing. The keywords help the readers to decide

whether the research is the one they are looking for.

 2.2.1.2. Introduction. Every scientific study has to be introduced with

background information, which a reader must grasp in the remaining papers of the

author. The length of an introduction depends on the publication and the topic,

normally it takes between 300 and 500 words, but it should be identical in structure and

substance. Some journals write the introduction as a continuous essay, while others

sometimes split it into other components.

When writing the introduction, the author should remember that the reader of

the scientific work is supposed to know the subject in principle. The presentation must

thus eliminate simple facts and content material that would only be known by a

professional.

Pardede (2012, p. 7) argues that the introduction follows a general format of

paragraphs. First, the problem and its background in one paragraph. Second, in two or

three paragraphs, it discusses the problem, the reasons, and the method applied. Next,

stating the hypothesis in a clear way. Then, a brief summary of the previous studies. At

the end, the explanation of the concepts and terms used.

2.2.1.3. Methodology (Materials and Methods). Various journals may

have different sections in the middle structure. Some journals label this section

“Methodology” while others, especially those that publish reports on experimental

research, label it Methods & Materials. This section, which explains the research

procedures employed, is highly necessary for enthusiastic readers for it allows them to

repeat the author’s work and reproduce his or her findings. Achieving this, the author

must explain exactly what he or she did: what experiments were carried out and how

they were conducted, what equipment and materials were used and how they were used,

how much, how often, what, where, when, and why.

 2.2.1.4. Results. Results are the final findings of a research. Yang (1999,

p 63) claims that the results section is the meat of a paper and the most essential part of

a study. Sometimes the results and discussion are joined into one section; if not it is of

the sake of clarity. This is beneficial especially when preliminary data must be

discussed to demonstrate why subsequent data were taken.

2.2.1.5. Discussion. A scientific article's discussion part restates the key

results but in the context of knowledge development, influence on education, and future

research. In other words, the discussion takes the results provided in the results section

and analyses them, assesses their importance, and analyses their consequences. This is

maybe the most complicated one to write and shows how well the author knows the

outcomes among the entire sections of the article. Some publications restrict the portion

of the discussion above 5 pages or 1500 words with double spacing.

Peat (2002) presents a template for writing an effective discussion section

(Figure 3).

Figure 2- 2
Template for the discussion

Paragraph 1

What did this study show? Address the aims stated in the introduction

Paragraph 2

Strengths and weaknesses of methods

Paragraph 3 to n-1

Discuss how the results support the current literature or refute current
 Final paragraph

Future directions

Note. Peat (2002, p. 87)

The template describes the procedure and the content of each paragraph section.

The first paragraph introduces the aim of the research that was mentioned at the level of

the introduction. The second paragraph shows the both positive and negative sides of

the method. The third paragraph deals with the results. The last paragraph discusses the

influence of the study on future studies.

(The models provided for the discussion section remain a debate, because each

researcher offers his own).

2.2.1.6. Conclusion. Conclusion is the last part of a research where

writers provide a summary for the whole work. Lebrun (2007) highlights that a

Conclusion section is a place where the author restates the contribution of the research,

with a particular emphasis on what it allows others to do; and suggest further research

to avoid duplication of effort or to encourage collaboration.

2.2.1.7. References. In general, every research project depends partly on

the activity of other scientific research projects. Whenever an author quotes from

external resources, he or she must use systematic references to identify his or her

sources. The relevance of references to a publication is not only to recognize the ideas

and labor of other scientists but also to offer readers access to these sources. The two

basic elements of a referencing system are the “text citation” and the “reference list.”
Some journals use the American Psychological Association (APA) style; others,

Modern Language Association (MLA) style.

2.3. Research and Publication Ethics

2.3.1. Research Ethics

Research is a process of gathering data that seek to increase and to create new

knowledge via scientific research. While writing a scientific paper, researcher may find

himself or herself facing problems such as plagiarism, we call this “Ethical problem”.

Ethical problems appear whenever there is an interference between the written paper of

the author and the actual research they have done. (Uhm, 2016) wrote, “Research ethics

are mainly of two fields; research integrity and publication ethics. Research misconduct

can occur in both areas. Examples of the research integrity violations are falsification,

fabrication, and plagiarism; and those of the publication ethics violations are duplicate

publication including self-plagiarism, and improper authorship …” Thus, research

integrity can be about: honesty, accountability, courtesy, and professional courtesy.

The research consists of four major phases. In each phase, unethical approaches

are practiced; these are proposing (changing results), performing (fabrication),

reporting (plagiarism), and reviewing (violation of the authorship rule) (Roy & Rana,

2020, p. 25).

To explain what Roy and Rana claimed, during the proposing of the research, there is a

change in the results to match the study of the researcher. In the performing, fabrication

is used for the destruction of data. When reporting the research, plagiarism appears to

copy others words. Plagiarism is the act of copying another person's intellectual

property without credit or attribution. It can also be considered unethical and has

unfavourable effects on the careers of researchers. It can be controlled through the

usage of anti-plagiarism software such as Plagiarism Checker. Finally, reviewing the

research, the unethical approach is known as a violation of the authorship rule. These

unethical acts lead to serious consequences.

2.3.2. Publication Ethics

The use of information technology and computers in this period has given rise

to new dimensions in publishing. Online publication has supplanted printing.

Researchers share their research knowledge and discoveries with readers and followers

by publishing their research knowledge and discoveries online in the form of papers.

This is known as electronic publishing, sometimes known as e-publishing or digital

publishing. It covers the publication of e-books and electronic papers that are accessible

via the internet or other networks.

Publication ethics provides us with specific criteria for submitting our work. It

informs about the types of content that are and are not suitable for publication. It

provides a detailed account of the peer-reviewed process. It advises on the inclusion of

any appropriate ethical declarations.

Publication ethics contribute to excellent scientific practice in the pursuit of

accurate, sufficient, and relevant knowledge. These are standards that govern the

research community by assuring honesty, accountability, impartiality, and critique

among other things. It fosters appropriate relationships with those who participate in

research by assuring respect, human dignity, confidentiality, free and informed

permission, and so on.

Before submitting any work authors must check the authenticity of their work to

make sure its ethic. According to the Ethics Toolkit from Elsevier (2017), there are five

main reasons for publishing ethically; it ensures scientific progress, protects life and
planet, promotes ethical behaviour, gives a good reputation for the author and it is the

only way to publish.

2.4. Working with Journals

Choosing the accurate journal for a scientific paper will affect its chances of

being published easily and quickly. The appropriate journal is the one that maximizes

the speed and convenience of publishing, the professional reputation the scientists get,

and the accessibility for the readers. These aspects are intertwined, and it might be

beneficial to design a publication plan to enhance the publication’s success.

One of the primary concerns is whether the journal peer reviews the articles that

it publishes. The peer-review process is vital to evaluate the quality of researcher’s

work and if a research profile is developed, he should look for peer-reviewed

publications to publish.

According to Cargill and O’Connor (2009, pp. 69-71) when picking a journal

for work, we have certain problems to consider; The scope and aims of the journal,

The audience for the journal, Journal impact, Using indices of journal quality, Time to

publication, and Page charges or Open Access costs.

2.5. Algerian EFL Articles

English as a Foreign Language (EFL) was defined by Iwai (2011) that EFL

refers to those who learn English in non-English speaking countries. It is used by non-

native English learners such as Algerian learners of English in Algeria. Publishing an

article as an EFL writer may be hard for some Algerian writers, however; we cannot

deny the number of their published articles in national and international databases. Still,

the number of publications does not always refer to the productivity of writers.

3. Scientific Platforms (Databases)

 In today’s world, which is dominated by technology, many national and

international scientific researchers tend to release their work online. Different platforms

give a chance for researchers to publish their outcomes under certain conditions and

privacy terms. Martíuez defined database as “a set of data organized in a logical

sequence that allows simple access, so that the information it contains can be: updated,

used at any time by any computer program which it is connected to and operated at all

times according to different criteria” (Martíuez, 1995). He explains the importance and

the role of database as a source of updated information that can be used at any time.

3.1. Algerian Scientific Journal Platform (ASJP)

ASJP is an electronic publishing platform for Algerian scientific journals

developed and managed in 2009 by CERIST. ASJP, Journal of studies and research, a

quarterly Algerian international scientific journal under the supervision of a scientific

body of experienced and competent researchers from inside and outside the country and

followed up by a competent jury formed periodically to evaluate research and studies. It

was published by the University of Xian Ashour in Algiers, and the journal is

accredited within international databases. ASJP specializes in academic studies and

research with expertise in the field of Humanities, Social Sciences, Islamic sciences,

literature, languages, arts and civilization, Law, Political Sciences, Economic Sciences,

Education Sciences, Psychology, and related sciences. The journal aims to publish the

original scientific research by researchers, professors and doctoral students in order to

disseminate knowledge and access to new and serious research and link communication

between researchers. ASJP also aims to provide access to research and studies to the

largest possible number of researchers. It accepts scientific works written in Arabic,

French and English that have not Information, quoting ideas, attributing them to their
owners, and documenting them by scientific methods. ASJP contains 148.423 articles

and 673 reviews.

Recently, ASJP added to its platform “BibTex”. BibTex is a management tool,

which describes and processes lists of references in a LaTeX document. (LaTeX is a

software system for document preparation).

3.2. System National de Documentation en Ligne (SNDL)

System National de Documentation en Ligne was launched in 2011 by CERIST.

It provides access to a wide range of national and international electronic documents

covering all aspects of education and scientific research. (Waltman & Van Eck, 2013)

In terms of access, this documentation is classified into two categories: the first

category is accessible without restriction to all students, teacher-researchers, and

permanent researchers within university campuses and research centres. The other

category, on the other hand, concerns the research aspect. It is dedicated to teacher-

researchers, permanent researchers, post-graduation students (PhD. students and

Magisters), engineering students at the end of the cycle, and Master2.

SNDL allow access to a large number of databases. It is divided into: Resources

with 28 databases (ScienceDirect, ACM Digital Library, IEEE…etc.), Open access

with 33 databases (SpringerOpen, WileyOpenAccess, open access…etc.), and an under

test database called Sagacitelink.

3.3. Elsevier

Elsevier is a scientific publishing company specializing in scientific, technical,

and medical content. The world leader in information and analytics, Elsevier, assists

researchers and medical practitioners in advancing science and improving health

outcomes for society. We have been supporting the work of our research and health

partners for 140 years, building upon our origins in publishing. Elsevier provides

knowledge and valuable analysis to help our users achieve breakthroughs and advance

society. There are 8,600 employees, including 1,906 worldwide technologists.

Elsevier support research journey and enable research via its cross-discipline

platforms (ScienceDirect, Scopus, SciVal, Reaxys, Complete Anatomy, ClinicalKey,

Knovel, Mendeley, ClinicalPath, Sherpath, and SSRN).

From the above we mention:

3.3.1. ScienceDirect

ScienceDirect offers more than 18 million pieces of information in over 4,300

journals and more than 42,000 eBooks and attracts more than 18 million people every

month, and is the world's largest platform for peer-reviewed primary scientific and

medical research. Elsevier has continued to invest in ScienceDirect and has integrated

new remote access ways that enable researchers to use its tools conveniently, securely

and securely from home ensuring that their privacy and data are safeguarded.

Thousands of Elsevier journals, articles and book chapters are available on

ScienceDirect as open access.

3.3.2. Scopus

Scopus claims to be the largest database of peer-reviewed literature that was

launched in 2004 by Elsevier. It provides access to databases and citation data from all

major disciplines published from 1966 onward (the access is under subscription). It

covers three types of sources: book series, journals and trade journals.
 Scopus includes a number of around 75 million records across 25.000 journals,

more than 24,600 active titles and more than 194,000 books. The temporal coverage is

from 2004 to present.

3.3.3. Mendeley

A unique research and social cooperation platform, Mendeley supports,

organizes, writes, and collaborates with more than 15 million people worldwide, from

undergraduates to professionals. Mendeley Data provides scholars with a collection of

open data for their study to be accessible to the public.

3.3.4. SSRN

SSRN is an online preprint community of open access in which scholars publish

their findings before being published in academic publications. It serves as the location

of specialized research networks in the social, life, and physical fields for the quick

dissemination of findings around the world. At present, SSRN has more than 2.6

million visits every month, with more than 950,000 papers by over 500,000 writers. It

has retrieved 22,9 million references from its whole text collection on early-stage

research and has matched more than 2,7 million citations.

3.4. Web of Science (WoS)

The Web of Science is the world’s most famous publisher-independent

worldwide citation database. It is the most powerful research engine, offering best-in-

class publication and citation data to the library for confident discovery, access, and

assessment. The access is under subscription. WoS is guided by the legacy of Dr.

Eugene Garfield, founder of the world's first citation index. The Institute for Scientific

Information (ISI) was the first producer, then after, its intellectual property transferred

to Thomson Reuters, and currently Clarivate Analytics handles the maintenance. It

includes different formats, as such full-text articles, reviews, editorials, chronologies,

abstracts, proceedings (journals and book-based), and technical papers. WoS provides a

standardized search language, navigation environment, and data structure that enables

researchers to search extensively across disparate resources and navigate to relevant

research findings and assess impact using the index's inherent citation links.

The WoS includes journal articles from all major disciplines (science, social

science, arts and humanities). The total number of records is beyond 90 million

(journals, books, and proceedings), 48 million patent families (more than 97 million

patents), and 10 million data sets. Its temporal coverage is from 1900 to the present.

3.5. Google Scholar (GS)

Google Scholar is the newest entry into the scientific database community. It a

freely available database, released in Beta in 2004 by Alex Verstak and Anurag

Acharya. By that time, according to Anurag Acharya of Google, the content included

‘peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, preprints, abstracts and technical reports’

(Acharya, 2004); it has since expanded the content – patents in November 2006 and

United States legal information in November 2009. GS indexes the full text or metadata

of the scientific literature from the most peer-reviewed online academic journals, books,

conference papers, theses, preprints, abstracts, technical reports, court opinions and

patents. Users may use GS to look for digital or physical versions of articles, whether

online or in libraries.

GS is most valuable, however; it has been criticized for not ban the predatory

journals), and that it cannot be used to analyse the publishing performance and impact

of researchers

3.6. Microsoft Academic (MA)

 Microsoft Academic, is a bibliographic free database, was previously called as

Microsoft Academic Search. It was re-launched in 2016 as a new service as Microsoft

Academic (MA) by Microsoft Research.

According to the information available on the webpage, it currently indexes

over 250 million publications; 88 million are journal articles.

3.7. Dimensions

Dimensions, a free database, was launched in 2018 as a new database that is

supported by Digital Science & Research Solutions Inc. and has been considered as an

alternative to WoS and Scopus (Martín-martín et al., 2018). According to its available

information, information, its goal is to provide “a more open and comprehensive data

infrastructure that empowered users to explore connections between a wide range of

research data”. Dimensions include connections to the traditional document types

(articles, conference papers, books, etc.), but also offer links to grants, patents, clinical

trials, datasets, and policy papers.

The number of records that contain Dimensions is higher than 106 million

publications with over 1.2 billion citations openly accessible at app.dimensons.ai.

According to the webpage, Dimensions delivers a 360° perspective of research

output: the cited and citing publications; related grants; supporting funders; article

metrics; the related patents, clinical trials, policy documents, and datasets; and much

more.

Conclusion

In closing, this chapter has been designed in an attempt to introduce

bibliometric analysis of articles. It went on to provide a close look at the scientific

articles and EFL Algerian researchers. Finally yet importantly, this chapter concluded

with various databases that can help researchers to publish their writings.

CHAPTER TWO: FIELDWORK

Introduction

The current study sets sights on multiple purposes. First, it aims to conduct a

bibliometric analysis of the Algerian EFL scientific articles

in Scopus and ASJP databases. Second, a comparative study is used to depict the

alternative differences of the Algerian scientists publishing on both platforms, also to

see the extent to which they are interrelated in some established rules. The focus is

placed on the most used keywords (co-occurrence), the most collaborative authors, and

the most collaborative countries (co-authorship), cited references (co-citation).This

chapter also introduces the research procedures implemented in the selection of this

study, tools, data collection, data analysis, as well as the interpretation and discussion

of the results.

1. Research Methodology

1.1. Selection of Research Subjects

To achieve the objectives of this study, two databases were selected to collect

the articles. The participants are Algerian EFL Scientists. This study uses a systematic

and structured method through a bibliometric analysis which is based on four stages:

1. Searching for articles from the Scopus and ASJP databases,

2. filtering out articles to be included in the bibliometric analysis,

3. checking and completing articles metadata, and

conducting bibliometric analysis using the VOSviewer application (Julia et al., 2020)
 To this end, analyses were provided of 23 articles deemed suitable for the

analysis of the articles collected from the databases (SCOPUS/ASJP ). Then, our

comparative analysis emphasized on the explanation of differences, and the explanation

of similarities. This helps to establish relationships between the articles published in

both databases and provide valid reasons in terms of their quality and productivity.

1.2. Data collection

In scientific research, databases such as Elsevier Scopus, Web of Science

(WoS), Microsoft Academic (MA), Dimensions, and Google Scholar (GS) are the main

bibliographic databases used in bibliometric analysis. In this study, Scopus and ASJP

are databases used for data collection. The main factor in choosing these databases is

that we can easily gather the data required for bibliometric analysis. In this context, an

online search of both databases was conducted on May 2021. To avoid the changes

caused by daily updating in the databases. Thus , the needed information was gathered.

In 2004 Elsevier introduced Scopus which became the largest database. Scopus

has a scope of approximately 19,500 peer-reviewed journals and more than 4.6 million

conference proceeding. In addition, SCOPUS covers about 70% more sources

compared to the other databases. While, ASJP includes 145746 articles in 668 journals,

Accordingly, two powerful databases control a wide range of refereed information; the

ASJP (created by CERIST) and Scopus (created by Elsevier). Thus, our systematic

database search was conducted using the two above mentioned databases.

1.3. Method and Tools

This study employed the bibliometric method and used quantitative and

statistical analysis to report several research articles on specific topics related to EFL

Algerian Scientific articles. Statistical analysis involves the comparison between the

features of the articles written on both platforms.

 To analyse the results, many software tools are used to conduct a bibliometric

analysis. Among these tools we have VOSviewer version 1.6.16 was published on

November 25, 2020. VOSviewer is one of the most widely-used tool for researchers

who tend to perform a bibliometric analysis written on any subject. This software was

developed at the Centre of Science and Technology Studies, Leiden University, and it is

freely downloadable to the bibliometric research community.

1.4. Data analysis and Procedures

To perform the bibliometric analysis of the 23 articles which have been

extracted from Scopus and ASJP, a bibliometric maps were created via the VOSviewer

program to draw the results of:

1. The most used keywords, and the index keywords (co-occurrence);

2. the most collaborative authors, and the most collaborative countries (co-

authorship);

3. cited references, cited sources (co-citation).

An electronic search on the SCOPUS and ASJP databases was performed via

using the keyword “EFL Algerian” to reach the relevant publications of the searched

term in the articles’ titles, references, indexes etc. Each data were retrieved in Comma-

separated values (CSV) format.CSV is a plain text file that contains a list of data to

exchange them between different application. The initial search resulted in a total

number of 10519 documents in ASJP (only 14 articles were chosen) and nine from

Scopus. The ASJP's sample is larger compared to Scopus for analytical reasons.

The procedures of this study were as follows (The data were normalized using

VOSviewer software):

1. Select the appropriate databases (Scopus and ASJP for our case) ;

2. filtering out the articles to be included in the study;

 3. export them in CSV format;

4. launch VOSviewer program;

5. Choose a type of data: Press the " Create " button on the File tab to Create a

map(choose the second option used for creating a map based on bibliographic

data) and press the Next button;

6. Choose data source: pick the first option, read data from the bibliographic file,

then press the Next button ;

7. Select file: Browse data from Scopus file, press the Next button;

8. Choose a type of analysis and counting method: co-authorship, co-occurrence,

citation, bibliographic coupling, co-citation with all units of analysis, Next

button;

9. Choose thresholds until the map to be analyzed is obtained;

10. Analyze and visualize your maps (for more clarification check VOSviewer

manual 1.6.16 version by Nees Jan van Eck and Ludo Waltman).

2. Research results

This section presents the results of the analyses that were carried out, as

outlined above. The results are presented according to the use of each database. The

discussion of the results presented in form of graphs, tables, and visualization of

bibliometric networks.

2.1. Scopus

2.1.1. Theme 1: co-authorship

The co-authorship visualization of VOSviewer was used to analyze the

cooperation pattern of the authors, organizations, and countries publishing on EFL. One
of the aims of our analysis is to explore the existing collaboration between those

authors and countries.

2.1.1.1. Authors.

The authorship analysis includes the collaboration of different authors and

details about their publications. Based on the collected data, the cooperation network of

the authors related to the research area was visually mapped in ( Figure 4, Table 3).

Table 0- 1
Co-Authorship the Most Collaborative Authors ranked by the Number of Total Link
Strength related to EFL Algerian

Id Author Documents Citations T. L. S

1 Djoudi. M 2 0 2
2 Zidat. S 2 0 2
3 Abdelhay. B 1 1 1
4 Al-Jamal. D.A 1 1 1
5 Allal. R 1 1 1
6 Bedjaoui. F 1 1 1
7 Belmekki. A 1 0 1
8 Benhaddouche. W 1 1 1
9 Ghania. O 1 2 1
10 Khalid. Z 1 2 1
11 Stambouli. M.H.B 1 0 1
12 Zennou. B 1 1 1
13 Belkhir-Benmostefa. F.Z 1 0 0
14 Djamàa. S 1 0 0
Note. T. L. S: Total Link Strength indicates the total strengh of the co-authorship links

of a given researcher with other researcher.

Table 3 shows the results obtained from the analysis of the author co-

authorship among 14 authors; the most two collaborative authors in the subject of EFL

Algerian, are as the following: Djoudi. M (Documents=2, Citations=0, total link

strength=2), Zidat. S (Documents=2, Citations=0, total link strength=2), It can be seen

from this table that, though some authors linked relatively less, their publication was

cited a lot. The authors are Ghania. O (Documents=1, Citations=2, total link

strength=1), Khalid. Z (Documents=1, Citations=2, total link strength=1).

Figure 4 displays the network visualization (the visual component to network

analysis,it is like a central or connecting point) of author (Co-authorship) links between

14 authors. The nodes (the nodes can be for instance publications, journals, researchers,

or keywords) represent the authors, and the size of the author represents the number of

his or her publications. Lines between authors reflect co-authorship links (A link is

either a connection or a relationship between two items), authors with partnerships tend

to be placed on the map close to one another. Though links between authors represent

citations shared between those authors. Colors indicate clusters (A cluster is a set of

items) of authors who are relatively closely related to co-authorship links. It has been

seen from the following map (Figure 4), that there are eight clusters namely cluster-1

having 2 items, 1 document, and 1 total link strength. Cluster-2 having 2 items, 1

document, and 1 total link strength. Cluster-3 having 2 items, 1 document, and 1 total

link strength. Cluster-4 having 2 items, 1 document, and 1 total link strength. Cluster-5

having 2 items, 1 document, and 1 total link strength. Cluster-6 having 2 items, 2

documents, and 2 total link strengths. Cluster-7 having 1 item, 1 document, and 0 total

link strength. Cluster-8 having 1 item, 1 document, and 0 total link strength.
Figure 0- 1
Network Visualization of Authors’ Collaboration / Co-Authorship related to EFL
Algerian

2.1.1.2. Countries. Table 4 shows the most collaborative countries that

published articles on EFL Algerian indexed by Scopus. Algeria was in the first position

with 8 publications, followed by France having 2, and Jordan was ranked the last with 1

publication.

Table 0- 2
Co-Authorship the Most Collaborative Countries ranked by the Number of Total Link
Strength related to EFL Algerian

Id Country Documents Citations T. L. S

1 Algeria 8 4 2
 2 France 2 0 2
3 Jordan 1 1 1

From the data in Figure 5, it is apparent that there are 3 items distributed over

two clusters. Each node indicates a country: (red) Algeria, (green)

Jordan. Accordingly, the closer the two countries are, the stronger and greater their

connection. Moreover, the size of the nodes indicates their degree of publication and

the thickness of links indicates the intensity of collaboration between the countries.

The number of collaborators with Algeria is 4 and the total link strength is 2

with 8 publications. The main partner of Algeria is France. Almost as remarkably, the

total link strength of Jordan is 1 and the country has not cooperated with the two other

countries in the topic of sharing the experience about EFL Algerian.

Figure 0- 2
Network visualization of the Collaborative Countries/ Co- Authorship related to EFL

Algeria
.

2.1.2. Theme 2: co-occurrence

The used tool for this research is made for the construction of the co-

occurrence bibliometric map using all keywords, and index keywords obtained from the

Scopus database.
 2.1.2.1. All keywords.

Table 0- 3
Co-Occurrence of all keywords related to EFL Algerian

ID KEYWORD OCCURRENCES T. L. S
1 Algeria 2 20
2 E-Learning 2 28
3 Evaluation 2 28
4 Gender Bias 2 6
5 Reading 2 28
Comprehension
6 Reading Skills 2 28
7 Students 2 28
8 Algerian 1 3
University
9 Analyse Of 1 13
Variances
10 Byram’s Model 1 5
11 Content Analysis 1 2
Method
12 Culture 1 5
13 Efl 1 3
14 Efl Classroom 1 3
15 Efl Teachers’ 1 4
Perceptions
16 Elt Textbooks 1 4
17 English-As-A- 1 13
Foreign-Language
18 Foreign Language 1 15
19 Gender Positioning 1 4
20 Improvement Of 1 13
Reading Skills
21 Information 1 15
Technology
22 Language Teaching 1 13
23 Language 1 13
Teachings
24 Learning English 1 15
25 Lmd System 1 3
26 Native Language 1 15
27 Online 1 15
 Environments
28 Online Learning 1 15
Environment
29 Online Reading 1 13
Comprehension
30 Online Readings 1 13
31 Online Systems 1 15
32 Research Questions 1 15
33 Secondary Stage 1 5
34 Smartphones 1 3
35 Students, Beliefs 1 3
36 Syllabus Design 1 3
37 Teachers 1 3
38 Teachers’ Practices 1 5
39 Teaching 1 13
40 Teaching-Learning 1 13
Process
41 Textbook 1 2
Illustrations
42 User Interfaces 1 15
43 Visual Discourse 1 4
44 Web Mode 1 15
45 Yarmouk 1 5
University

As can be seen from the Table (above), the keywords are arranged to prove

which the most recurring in the research. In the articles examined within the framework

of our study, the minimum number of occurrences of a keyword option is set to 1 and

45 keywords are selected in the used software tool. Subsequently, the most used

keywords were identified as the following: : Algeria (occurrence=2, total link

strength=20), e-learning (occurrence=2, total link strength=28),

evaluation(occurrence=2, total link strength=28), gender(occurrence=2, total link

strength=6), bias Reading Comprehension(occurrence=2, total link strength=28),

reading skills(occurrence=2, total link strength=28), students(occurrence=2, total link

strength=28), Algerian university(occurrence=1, total link strength=3), Analyse Of

Variances (occurrence=1, total link strength=13).

 The results, as shown in Table 5, indicate that a large number of keywords

appear one time.Which show a lack of usage and continuity in research, while the

keywords that have a greater number of repetitions allow identifying the topics most

used in the research field.

What projets in this Figure is that the bibliometric analysis of keywords shows

that there are 45 keywords involved in this research with different numbers of links

(216), total link strength (226), and 3 main clusters. Each cluster represents a topic

related to EFL Algerian. Cluster 1(red) with (14 items, 37 links, and 41 total link

strength), cluster 2(green) with (10 items, 15 links, and 15 total link strength) next,

cluster 3(blue) with (6 items, 25 links, and 25 total link strength). Thus, the size of the

circles reflects the frequency of keywords. The larger size of a circle is the more

keywords have been re-occurred in publications. The thicker line between two words,

the closer relationship is. Furthermore, Circles with the same color cluster suggested a

similar topic.

Figure 0- 3

Network visualization of all keywords/ co-occurrence related to EFL Algerian

2.1.3. Theme 3: co-citation

Co-citation analysis (is a kind of citation network analysis method) measures

the occurrence in which a pair of references is cited together. Being so, the higher the

co-citation, the greater the similarity between references, i. e it can be assumed that

there is a relationship between two references cited in the same article.

2.1.3.1. Cited references.

During our extraction of the cited references , we obtained 283 references. And

due to this large number, we decided to take only 15 references as a small sample that

reflects the other used references.

Table 0- 4
Co-Citation of Cited References related to EFL Algerian

Id Cited Reference Citations T.L.S

 Brantmeier, C., Does Gender Make A Difference? Passage Content
1 And Comprehension In Second Language Reading (2003) Reading In 2 6
A Foreign Language, 15 (1). , April
Brantmeier, C., Statistical Procedures For Research On L2 Reading
2 Comprehension: An Examination Of Anova And Regression Model 2 6
(2004) Reading In A Foreign Language, 16 (2). , October
Ounis, S., (2005) For Specific Purposes: A Case Study Of The 1st
3 Year Students At The Department Of Agronomy, , Master Thesis, 2 6
English Department, Batna University
Wolf, D., A Comparison Of Assessment Tasks Used To Measure Fl
4 Reading Comprehension (1993) Modern Language Journal, 77, Pp. 2 6
473-489
Porreca, K.L., Sexism In Current Esl Textbooks (1984) Tesol
5 1 10
Quarterly, 18 (4), Pp. 705-724. , Https://Doi.Org/10.2307/3586584
Renner, C.E., Women Are" Busy, Tall, And Beautiful (1997) Looking
6 At Sexism In Efl Materials, , Retrieved From Eric Database. 1 10
Ed411670
Rifkin, B., Gender Representation In Foreign Language Textbooks: A
7 Case Study Of Textbooks Of Russian (1998) The Modern Language 1 10
Journal, 82 (2), Pp. 217-236
Sadker, D., Gender Equity: Still Knocking At The Classroom Door
8 1 10
(1999) Educational Leadership, 56 (7), Pp. 22-27
Sadker, D.M., Zittleman, K., Practical Strategies For Detecting And
Correcting Gender Bias In Your Classroom. Gender In The
Classroom: Foundations, Skills, Methods, And Strategies Across The
9 1 10
Curriculum (2007) Multicultural Education: Issues And Perspectives,
Pp. 137-153. , J. A. Banks & C. A. Mcgee Banks Eds. New Jersey,
Usa: John Wiley & Sons, Inc
Sakita, T.I., Sexism In Japanese English Education: A Survey Of Efl
10 Texts (1995) Women And Language, 13 (2), P. 5. , Questia, Web, 05, 1 10
April 2018
Sunderland, J., Gender (Representation) In Foreign Language
Textbooks: Avoiding Pitfalls And Moving On (2015) Gender
11 1 10
Representation In Learning Materials: International Perspectives, Pp.
19-34. , S. Mills & M. S. Abolaji Eds. New York: Routledge
Sunderland, J., Gender In The Efl Classroom (1992) Elt Journal, 46
12 1 10
(1), Pp. 81-91. , Https://Doi.Org/10.1093/Elt/46.1.81
Sunderland, J., New Understanding Of Gender And Language
Classroom Research: Texts, Teachers And Student Talk (2000)
13 1 10
Language Teaching Research, 4 (2), Pp. 149-173. ,
Https://Doi.Org/10.1177/136216880000400204
Wodak, R., What Cda Is About - A Summary Of Its History,
Important Concepts And Its Developments (2002) Methods Of
14 1 10
Critical Discourse Analysis, Pp. 1-13. , R. Wodak & M. Meyer Eds.
London: Sage Publications, Ltd
Zerar, S., Riche, B., Of The Representation Of Women In The
Algerian Textbooks Of English (2014) Humanities And Social
15 Sciences Review, 3 (4), Pp. 33-41. , 1 10
Http://Www.Universitypublications.Net/Hssr/0304/Html/B4r466.Xml,
Retrieved From
 The results, as shown in Table 6, indicate that the primary references or

resources of EFL Algeria in Scopus appear with 283 citations. By the used software,

the analysis revealed that the nine articles cited 283 references with 134 total link

strenght. 15 references with a citation frequency greater than 1 were selected to create

the co-citation map, as shown in Figure 5 (all of them were classified into one cluster).

Reference co-citation analysis is an important means used to detect the structure and

growth of a specific domain. For example, Brantmeier’s, Sadker’s papers were cited 4,

2 times altogether respectively in those 283 documents. Others are cited once, like

Ounis, Wolf, Porreca, Sakita etc.

The more co-citations two documents receive, the higher their co-citation

strength, and the more likely they are semantically related.

The map (Figure 7) shows the co-citation patterns of the nine articles cited at

least once within the studies we reviewed. It visualizes the broader EFL research co-

citation networks. In the Figure, nodes represent the co-citation data. In this way, the

importance of nodes does not reveal the high number of citations. But, it illustrates the

research themes that are closely related to EFL research. The author-named nodes

represent highly co-cited articles. The larger the node, the higher the citation will be.

The line connecting two nodes represents the co-citation link between the two

references. There, the thickness of each link corresponding to the number of

citation counts by each author in that year.

Looking at Figure 7, it is apparent that there is one cluster with 11 items and

134 total link strenght (10 links for each).

Figure 0- 4
Network visualization of the cited references / co-citation related to EFL Algerian.

2.2. ASJP

2.2.1. Theme 1: co-authorship

2.2.1.1. Authors.

Table 0- 5
Co-Authorship. The Most Collaborative Authors Ranked by the Number of Total Link
Strength.

Id Author Documents Citations T. L. S

1 Antir R. 1 0 1
2 Berriche A. 1 0 1
3 Boubekka S. 1 0 1
4 Aliochouche F., 1 0 1
5 Arabet Mohamed A. 1 0 1
6 Bellit B. 1 0 1
7 Benaissi Bouhass F., 1 0 1
8 Dehda N. 1 0 1
 9 Hamane S. 1 0 1
10 Hamlaoui N. 1 0 1
11 Hocine N. 1 0 1
12 Kerroum F. 1 0 1
13 Maouche S. 1 0 1
14 Merrouche S. 1 0 1
15 Arab Kh. 1 0 0
16 Benettayeb A. 1 0 0
17 Benettayeb-Ouahiani A. 1 0 0
18 Fedoul M. 1 0 0
19 Guerza R. 1 0 0
20 Merabti Z. 1 0 0
21 Tobbi S. 1 0 0

It is apparent from this table (Table 7) that very few authors have very few

number citations. The Analysis revealed that the 14 articles, with a total of 21 authors

were identified, they divided into 14 clusters, as shown in Figure 6 . All of the 21

authors produced only one paper. The more times those authors share the authorship of

a paper, the stronger is the co-authorship connection between them. According to the

number of articles and the number of citations received, a little correlation is revealed

between authors, namely: Antir R., Berriche A., Boubekka S., Alioc houche F., Arabet

Mohamed A., Bellit B, Benaissi., Bouhass F., etc.

Figure 8, further shows the network visualization map of the co-authorship

among different authors. The color, circle size, and thickness of connecting lines

indicate the strength of the relationship among the authors. Related authors, as

indicated by the same color, are commonly listed together. For example, the map

suggests that Hamane S ., Kerroum F., Benaissi Bouhass F., Arabet Mohamed A

belonging to the same cluster (6), (4) respectively have collaborated closely. From the

analysis, most of the authors have a weak collaboration with other authors ( 1 link for

each). Others do not have (0 links) which means no cooperation traced between them.
Figure 0- 5
Network visualization of authors’ collaboration / co-authorship related to EFL
Algerian

2.2.1.2. Countries.

Table 0- 6
Co-Authorship. The Most Collaborative Countries Ranked by the Number of Total Link
Strength related to EFL Algerian

TOTAL
ID COUNTRY DOCUMENTS CITATIONS LINK
STRENGTH
1 (Algeria) 2 0 0
2 Algeria 5 0 0
3 Annaba 1 0 0
Batna-2 University
4 1 0 0
(Algeria)
5 Chlef 1 0 0
6 Tizi-Ouzou 1 0 0
7 Tlemcen-Algeria 1 0 0
 Regarding the co-authorship of countries in this field, the minimum articles

published by each country considered at least one article. According to these criteria, 7

countries were included in this analysis. In the context of results extracted from the

above table, the most publications countries are from Algeria (5, 2 documents ); next

from Annaba, Chlef (1 document), Surprisingly, no evidence was found for

associations between countries in terms of their publication, the total link strength is

equal to zero, which means neither Algeria nor Annaba have collaborated with each

other in EFL context.

Figure 9 indicates the top seven countries from where most EFL Algerian

research originated. Algeria has the leading position (7 documents, 0 total link strength),

followed by Annaba (1 document, 0 total link strength) and Batna (1 document, 0 total

link strength). The remaining distribution of countries represents the same. In the

process of mapping Figure 7, the minimum document threshold of a country is set at 1.

There were seven countries listed as visualization items. We included all seven

countries associated with 21 authors in the analysis of co-authorship. The related

countries are divided into seven clusters each cluster has different countries of co-

authorship, such as Algeria, Annaba, Batna, Chlef, Tizi-Ouzou, and Tlemcen, which

shows the diversification of research directions. The bigger nodes represent the

influential countries (Algeria). The links between nodes represent the cooperative

relationships among countries the distance between the nodes and the thickness of the

links represent the level of cooperation among countries. Unfortunately, no link has

been detected. So, no significant correlation was found between countries.

Figure 0- 6
 Network visualization of the collaborative countries/ co-authorship related to EFL

Algerian

2.2.2. Theme 2: co-occurrence

2.2.2.1. All keywords.

Table 0- 7
Co-Occurrence of all keywords Related to EFL Algerian

ID Keyword OCCURRENCES T. L. S

1 Algerian Efl 1 11
2 Algerian Efl Context 1 1
Attitudes, Challenges
Collaborative Writing, Efl
Writing
3 Algerian Efl Education 1 5
4 Algerian Efl Middle 1 5
School Teachers
5 Assessment, Efl 1 1
University Classroom,
Innovation, University
Teacher, University
Student.
6 Assessment, Motivation, 1 1
 Classroom.,
Accountability, Testing,
Evaluation
7 Awareness 1 5
8 Baccalaureate In Algeria 1 5
9 Based Learning, Efl 1 5
Context, Teachers’
Perceptions, Educational
10 Cblt. 1 5
11 Challenges And Prospects 1 5
12 Classroom Practices 1 5
13 Collocational 1 11
Competence, Efl Leaners,
Miscollocations, Words
14 Communicated, Efl 1 1
Performance, Dialogues
15 Conversational 1 1
Interaction, Ict, Learner
Initiative, Efl Learning.
16 Correlation 1 11
17 Critical Pedagogy, Efl, 1 1
Teaching, Learning
18 Cultural Content 1 5
19 Culture 1 5
20 Developmental Dyslexia 1 5
21 Dyslexia, Reality, 1 5
Pedagogy, Awareness,
Learning Difficulty,
Skills, Learning
Disabilities
22 Educational, School, 1 5
Teaching And Learning,
Classes
23 Educational, Teachers, 1 1
Knowledge, Dominant
Ideology
24 Efl Students 1 5
25 Efl Teachers 1 5
26 Essay Writings 1 11
27 Familiarity 1 5
28 Ict (Computer/Internet) – 1 1
Extensive Reading - Efl
Classroom.
29 Integrated Approach 1 5
30 "Intercultural
Communication, Design,,
Analysis, Content
Analysis, Critical
Discourse
analysis" 5
31 Intercultural Task 1 5
32 Intertextuality - Efl 1 1
Learners - Text -
Discourse.
33 Language Proficiency 1 11
34 Mobile Learning, M- 1 5
Learning, Smartphones,
Computer-Assisted
Language Learning
35 Mobile-Assisted 1 5
Language Learning
36 Noun 1 11
37 Perception, Discourse, 1 1
Communicative,
Academic Contexts,
Spoken Or Written
Language
38 Policies 1 5
39 Proficiency, Qualitative 1 1
Knowledge,
Pronunciation, Lexical
40 Project Work 1 5
41 Collocations

According to the obtained Table 9, it is observed that the 41 used keywords

have the same number of occurring (1). there is a positive and significant correlation

between the number of keywords and the number of citations. The most common

keywords, as reported in Table 8, are Algerian Efl, Algerian EFL Context, Attitudes,

Challenges, and Collaborative Writing, EFL Writing etc. All of them appeared only

once with different total link strengths. This is probably indicated a lack of continuity in

research and a wide disparity in the research focuses.

As seen from Figure 10, the im[ortant concepts embedded in the selected

publications can be mapped into one cluster. The analysis reveals that the term

‘Algerian EFL’ was highly associated with: essay writing, lexical collocations, students,

competence, and language proficiency. The second link was the term ‘use’ has many

concepts related to Algerian EFL, student, collocational competence, language

proficiency, and other words. What is noticeable from the presented results is that there
is a large consistency between the used keywords .i. e, there is a close relationship

between the items of the covered topic (with 11links, 1occurrence for all items). The

main reason for researchers to combine the concepts of this context would be their

interest in studying EFL Algerian. The map includes one cluster with 12 items;

Algerian EFL, collocational competence, collocations, correlation, essay writings,

language proficiency, lexical collocations, noun, student, undergraduate, use, and verb.

which are parts of the research areas of EFL Algerian. The lines linking the keywords

express the sharing of their appearance in the same research work. The color, circle size,

and thickness of connecting lines represent relationships with other keywords. In this

cluster, all the keywords have the same color, that is why they are commonly listed

together.

Figure 0- 7
Network visualization of all keywords/ co-occurrence related to EFL Algerian

2.2.3. Theme 3: co-citation

 2.2.3.1. Cited references.

Table 0- 8
Co-Citation of Cited References related to EFL Algerian

Id Cited Reference Citations T.L.S

1 "-Alkahtani, S.(1999). Teaching Esl Reading Using 1 0
Computers .The Internet Tesl Journal, Vol. V, No. 11,
November.

2 -Apple, M. W. (1996). Cultural Politics And Education. New York, Ny: 1 1

Teachers College Press.
3 -Apple, M. W. (2012). Can Education Change Society? (1st Ed.). 1 0
London, England: Routledge
4 -Burns, A. (2011). The Cambridge Guide To Second Language Teacher 1 0
Education. Ernst Klett Sprachen.
5 -Christensen, L., & Aldridge, J. (2013). Critical Pedagogy For Early 1 0
Childhood And Elementary Educators (2nd Ed.). Berlin, Germany:
Springer Science & Business Media.
6 -Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy Of The Oppressed. New York: Herder And 1 2
Herder.
7 -Guilherme, M. (2002). Critical Citizens For An Intercultural World: 1 0
Foreign Language Education As Cultural Politics. Bristol, United
Kingdom: Multilingual Matters.
8 -Kincheloe, J. L. (2008). Knowledge And Critical Pedagogy: An 1 0
Introduction. Berlin, Germany: Springer Science & Business Media.
9 -Lovern, L. L., & Knowles, F. (2015). A Critical Pedagogy For Native 1 0
American Education Policy: Habermas, Freire, And Emancipatory
Education. Basingstoke, England: Springer.
10 -Mclaren, P. (1999). Research News And Comment: A Pedagogy Of 1 0
Possibility: Reflecting Upon Paulo Freire’s Politics Of Education.
Educational Researcher, 28(2), 49-56. Doi:10.3102/0013189x028002049
11 -Mclaren, P., & Kincheloe, J. L. (2007). Critical Pedagogy: Where Are 1 0
We Now? Bern, Switzerland: Peter Lang.
12 -Aliakbari, M., & Faraji, E. (2011). Basic Principles Of Critical 1 0
Pedagogy. In International Conference On Humanities, Historical And
Social Sciences.. Singapore: Iacsit Press
13 -Bartolome, L. I. (2004). Critical Pedagogy And Teacher Education: 1 0
Radicalizing Prospective Teachers. Teacher Education Quarterly.
14 -Breunig, M. (2009). Teaching For And About Critical Pedagogy In The 1 1
Post-Secondary Classroom. Studies In Social Justice, 3(2), 247-262.
Doi:10.26522/Ssj.V3i2.1018
15 -Crookes, G. (2009). The Practicality And Relevance Of Second 1 2
Language Critical Pedagogy. Language Teaching, 43(3), 333-348.
Doi:10.1017/S0261444809990292

16 -Mohamed, A. A., & Malik, A. (2014). Elt Teachers’ Awareness Of 1 2

Critical Pedagogy: A Cross-Cultural Study. Journal Of Elt And Applied
 Linguistics (Jeltal), 2(3)."

17 Watania: Al-Doukhoul Al-Madrassi 2013/2014 [Official Bulletin Of 1 0

National Education: Back To School 2013/2014]:
Http://Www.Education.Gov.Dz/Wpcontent/Uploads/2015/02/Beo111.Pdf
(Viewed On April 24th, 2020)

It is apparent from Table 10 that the analysis revealed the 14 articles cited 17

references. All the references are equal in a citation frequency were selected to create

co-citation map, as shown in Figure 9. Among the first author of these 14 articles,

Apple, m. w contributed only two publications. These articles entitled “Cultural

Politics And Education” “Can Education Change Society? ” were published in 1996,

2012 respectively, while no other author contributed more than 1 article, such as

Alkahtani, S., Burns, A., Christensen, L., & Aldridge, J. The further analysis presented

that there is a positive relationship between the number of references and the number of

citations. In this section, the significant and positive correlation demonstrates the

impact of the number of references on the number of citations that a study is likely to

receive.

Figure 11 shows the references used by the Algerian researchers referred to or

based on their specialists in EFL. These references, which located in 14 clusters with

different circles in the network. The most frequent references are depicted by Apple M.

W (1996), this author belongs to cluster 3 with only one citation and without having

any link with other authors published in the EFL context. A few links appear between

those references (4 links) with eight total link strengths. Thereby identifying the most

used references and displaying their respective interrelationships.

Figure 0- 8
Network Visualization of the Cited References / Co-Citation related to EFL Algerian

2.3. Comparative analysis

Conclusion
 GENERAL CONCLUSION

1. Summary of the Results

The present study was conducted to determine the EFL Algerian scientific

articles' progress in Scopus and ASJP platforms. The emphasis was on three main

notable aspects of bibliometric analysis by using the VOSviewer tool. Namely, co-

authorship (the most collaborative authors; and the most collaborative countries), co-

occurrence (the most used keywords), and co-citation (cited references). It aimed to ate

forms of these aspects in their written articles. It also sought to determine the extent to

which the Algerian scientists have improved their writing abiprovide an in-depth

understanding of Algerian success or failure in producing accurlities. In doing so,

research analysis required examining 23 articles written by different scientists in

Scopus and ASJP. Many authors have written about EFL Algerian as the main subject.

Prior to the process of analysis, we hypothesized that EFL learners‘ writing skill does

not develop significantly after three years of instruction. The Alternative hypothesis set

forth advocated that EFL learners‘ writing skill develops significantly after three years.

Hence, to test these hypotheses, a bibliometric analysis was adopted. The three

significant aspects of Scopus are compared to those of ASJP. The comparison

addressed each couple of elements from each database separately. The statistical

method was accomplished by using VOSviewer software for the analysis.

The results of examining the bibliometric method obtained from the study with

the statistical analysis revealed that the Algerian scientists had not made any
considerable progress concerning the previously mentioned aspects of the bibliometric

technique. Even so, there is a slight development in their academic writing.

Consequently, the null hypothesis established earlier that EFL learners‘ writing

skill does not develop significantly after a three-year period of instruction is refuted.

Hence, 53the alternative hypothesis is confirmed. Learners writing competence

develops significantly after three years of instruction.

2. Pedagogical Implications

This study investigates the EFL Algerian scientific articles and compares

Scopus, ASJP databases. It provides readers with a map of EFL research conducted on

both databases. The results could be insightful for both researchers and practitioners.

For new scholars interested in EFL research, this study offers a comprehensive

overview of existing EFL studies. This study can also help these scholars understand

the characteristics of the user databases. In addition, this study can also help these

scholars identify the blind spots in current research and future trends. It provides

valuable guidance to scholars concerned with bibliometric analysis that can apply in

different fields of study.

3. Limitations of the study

This study has limitations in several aspects.Although it has spotted the light on

how the process of publishing an article in such databases is, a lack in the collected

data from Scopus, made the sample not representative enough. The number of articles

understudy does not exceed 23 articles. It seems insufficient to represent a whole group

of more than 9000 articles. Still, it is important to note that it was difficult for the

researcher to find a sufficient number of Algerian scientists who published in Scopus

about EFL. Hence, it might be difficult to generalize the findings to what was obtained.

Moreover, the Vosviewer program was designed for the analysis of the articles chosen
from Web of Science, Scopus, Dimensions, and PubMed; though, the data of ASJP

have been hold manually to be extracted in CSV format. Furthermore, time was limited

and overwhelming; therefore, few aspects only were addressed. Accordingly, we

intended to publish this work as an article on Scopus or Wos database to make the work

more valuable. Unfortunately, this is not available since the procedures take much time,

maybe two months or more. Items dealing with index keywords and cited sources were

not tackled due to the absence of articles’ indexes, also an error was marked to the

insufficient number of sources despite the number of articles has been doubled (ASJP).

Consequently, the results of this study might lack some accuracy and reliability.

4. Suggestions for Further Research

Therefore, to expand the study on this topic, future studies may be able to use

further investigations to cover the following points:

 This subject can be discussed in greater detail with the different databases

and analyzes relevant to this field. Depending on several sources, other

bibliometric analysis software (Bibexcel, Biblioshiny, SciMat, CiteSpace),

and other categories of literature, for instance, review papers and book

chapters, parts of articles such as the abstract, with more details and focus

on ASJP database.

 The results of the findings obtained from the bibliometric analysis of this

study concerning the EFL Algerian can be used as a guide for the related

researchers for their studies in the future. For instance, they can get details

about existing trends in the field by examining the distribution of the most

used keywords by years, the most collaborative countries, or they can plan

their work accordingly.

 The process of booking data manually is stressful, especially if the number

of articles taken or approved for the study is large, may require more time

and effort to do it.Therefore, choose the appropriate tool to unload the data

that fit the content of each database.

 Enlarging the sample size via working on a more representative sample, if

any. A larger sample would allow for generalizing the findings to the whole

Population to have reliable work.

 References

Acharya, A. (2004) Scholarly pursuits [blog post]. Retrieved from

https://googleblog.blogspot.com/2004/10/scholarly-pursuits.html

Agyeman, E. A., & Bilson, A. (2015). Research Focus and Trends in Nuclear Science

and Technology in Ghana : A Bibliometric Study Based on the INIS Database.

Library Philosophy and Practice (e-Journal), 2.

Andres, A. (2009). Measuring Academic Research. Measuring Academic Research.

https://doi.org/10.1533/9781780630182

Bosman, J., Mourik, I. van, Rasch, M., Sieverts, E., & Verhoeff, H. (2006). Scopus

reviewed and compared. June.

Cargill, M., & O’Connor, P. (2009). Writing Scientific Research Articles Strategy and

Steps (1st ed.). Blackwell Publishing.

Chen, Y.-S., & Leimkuhler, F. F. (1986). A Relationship Between Lotka ’ s Law ,

Bradford ’ s Law , and Zipf ’ s Law. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN SOCIETY

FOR INFORMATION SCIENCE, 37(5), 307–314.

https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1097-4571(198609)37:5<307::aid-asi5>3.0.co;2-8

Fairthorne, A. (1969). Empirical Hyperbolic Distributions (Bradford-Zipf-Mandelbrot)

for Bibliometric Description and Prediction. In journal of documentation (Vol. 25,

Issue 4, pp. 319–343).

Gross, P. L. K., & Gross, E. M. (1927). College libraries and chemical education.

Science, 66(1713), 385–389. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.66.1713.385

Hazarika, T., Fore, R., & Goswami, K. (2003). Bibliometric Analysis of Indian

Forester : 1991-2000. IASLIC Bulletin, 48(4), 2I3-223.

Hubert, J. J. (1981). General Bibliometric Models. 65–82.

Iwai, Y. (2011). The Effects of Metacognitive Reading Strategies : Pedagogical

Implications for EFL / ESL Teachers. 11(2), 150–159.

Jacso, P. (2005). As we may search – Comparison of major features of the Web of

Science , Scopus , and Google Scholar citation-based and citation-enhanced

databases. CURRENT SCIENCE, 89(9), 1537-47.

Julia, J., Supriatna, E., Isrokatun, I., Aisyah, I., Hakim, A., & Odebode, A. A. (2020).

Moral Education ( 2010-2019 ): A Bibliometric Study ( Part 2 ). Universal Journal

of Educational Research, 8(7), 2954–2968.

https://doi.org/10.13189/ujer.2020.080724

Lebrun, J. L. (2007). SCIENTIFIC WRITING A READER AND WRITER’S GUIDE.

World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.

Martín-martín, A., Orduna-malea, E., & Thelwall, M. (2018). Google Scholar , Web of

Science , and Scopus : A systematic comparison of citations in 252 subject

categories. Journal of Informetrics, 12(4), 1160–1177.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2018.09.002

Martíuez, L. (1995). LÍNEAS DE INVESTIGACIÓN Y BASES DE DATOS PARA LA

INVESTIGACIÓN. 1, 35–50.

Mathankar, A. R. (2018). BIBLIOMETRICS : AN OVERVIEW. International Journal

of Library & Information Science (IJLIS), 7(3), 9–15.

http://iaeme.com/Home/journal/IJLIS
Mongeon, P. (2016). The journal coverage of Web of Science and Scopus : 213–228.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s11192-015-1765-5

Norris, M., & Oppenheim, C. (2007). Comparing alternatives to the Web of Science for

coverage of the social sciences ’ literature. 1(1), 161–169.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.joi.2006.12.001

Otlet, P. (1934). Traité de Documentation - Le Livre sur le Livre - Théorie et Pratique.

Pardede, P. (2012). Scientific Articles Structure. April, March, 16.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/260453687_SCIENTIFIC_ARTICLES_

STRUCTURE

Peat, J. (2002). Scientific Writing Easy when you know how. BMJ books.

www.bmjbooks.com

Raisig, L. M. (1962). Statistical Bibliography in the Health Sciences. Bulletin of the

Medical Library Association, 50(3).

Roy, D. A., & Rana, D. L. (2020). Ethics in Research & Publication. In Ethics in

Research & Publication (Issue September).

https://doi.org/10.47211/book.2020.9788194680413

Shanmugam, T. (2018). Journal of Social Sciences : A Bibliometric Study Journal of

Social Sciences : A Bibliometric Study. October.

https://doi.org/10.1080/09718923.2010.11892847

Slougui, D. (2009). a Social - Context Approach To Writing for International

Publication : the Case of Algerian Scientists. Mentouri University, Constantine

FACULTY.

Uhm, C. (2016). What Is Research Misconducts ? Publication Ethics Is as Important as

 Research Integrity. 46(2), 67–70.

Waltman, L., & Noyons, E. (2018). Bibliometrics for Research Management and

Research Evaluation Bibliometrics for Research Management and. Leiden Centre

for Science and Technology Studies (CWTS).

Waltman, L., & Van Eck, N. J. (2013). A smart local moving algorithm for large-scale

modularity-based community detection. European Physical Journal B, 86(11).

https://doi.org/10.1140/epjb/e2013-40829-0

Yang, ]en Tsi. (1999). AN OUTLINE OF SCIENTIFIC WRITING (J. N. Yang (ed.)).

World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.