Next Article in Journal
A Multiagent Game Theoretic Simulation of Public Policy Coordination through Collaboration
Previous Article in Journal
Subjective and Simulation-Based Analysis of Discomfort Glare Metrics in Office Buildings with Light Shelf Systems
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 15
Issue 15
10.3390/su151511886
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Bibliometric Analysis of Ambiguity Tolerance: Unearthing Its Role in Sustainable Language Education

by
Yi Xue
* and
Zhonggen Yu
*
Faculty of Foreign Studies, Beijing Language and Culture University, Beijing 100083, China
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2023, 15(15), 11886; https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511886
Submission received: 16 June 2023 / Revised: 13 July 2023 / Accepted: 31 July 2023 / Published: 2 August 2023
(This article belongs to the Section Sustainable Education and Approaches)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Against the backdrop of the COVID-19 post-pandemic era, ambiguity tolerance has been the subject of extensive research and scholarship. While ambiguity tolerance has long been a hot topic across multiple disciplines, scant attention has been given to its role in language education via bibliometric analysis. Two authors adopt an integrative study on ambiguity tolerance in sustainable language education to fill this void. Through a general review and visualization analysis, this study seeks to explore the various influential factors that are associated with ambiguity tolerance in language education. Author co-citation analysis (ACA) and the mapping knowledge domain (MKD) are the underlying theoretical frameworks for bibliographic visualization. VOSviewer and CitNetExplorer are two analytical software utilized to visualize bibliographic data. It is concluded that multilingualism, motivation, self-efficacy, and engagement are positively correlated with ambiguity tolerance and collectively contribute to improving language learning outcomes. Future research could further discuss ambiguity tolerance in the application of emerging technologies in the new decade.

1. Introduction

Since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic, especially in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era, language instruction modes have changed from traditional language classrooms to online courses. Learners suffer various psychological problems, such as stress, anxiety, pressure, and cognitive load. Subsequently, a surging trend of research has been carried out to cope with negative moods in the learning process. According to Hammond et al. [1], stress, pressure, cognitive overload, and burnout lead to erratic performance in ambiguous situations, which is a failure of tolerance. The personality trait ambiguity tolerance (AT) reflects psychological condition, which provides a way to perceive and prevent psychological problems [2]. An increasing number of studies have been carried out to discuss AT in different domains. However, none of the studies focus on the bibliometric analysis regarding AT and its correlates with language learning outcomes. Embracing new chances and challenges of education in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era, it is imperative to review the role of AT in sustainable language learning via bibliometric analysis.
This research seeks to complement this missing link through a comprehensive study of the interactive influence between ambiguity tolerance, self-efficacy [3], motivation [4], multilingualism [5], engagement [6,7], and learning outcomes [6,7]. AT is an indispensable psychological factor that could equip learners with the learning capacity to sustain language education in the post-pandemic era. Given the importance of AT in all trades of life, it is thus necessary to adopt a qualitative and quantitative approach to review its role. This article consists of six parts. We first review the prior documents on ambiguity-tolerance-correlated factors in the sustainable language learning context in Section 2. Then, we introduce the bibliometric research method and research procedure in Section 3. In Section 4, we present the results of bibliometric analysis by answering eight research questions. We attempt to explore ambiguity-tolerance-correlated factors and the function of AT in facilitating language learning outcomes. We analyze the results in Section 5 and conclude the major findings, limitations, and implications of this study in Section 6.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Ambiguity Tolerance

In psychology, ambiguity tolerance (AT) refers to the capability of managing vague and obscure cues without feeling disappointed. It is reasonable to review the pivotal role of AT in language learning. Numerous studies have reported the positive role of AT in sustainable language education. The language learning process is ambiguous and confusing as learners would encounter uncertain linguistic phenomena and cultural differences [6]. Consequently, language learners are likely baffled by unknown, unpredictable, complex, and complicated situations [6]. Correspondingly, AT is referred to as the capacity to cope with equivocal and puzzling situations without suffering negative psychological problems in the learning process [6,8]. In language education, the ability to face difficulties and setbacks without feeling frustrated is referred to as AT [7]. AT is individually different and reflects the information-accessing procedure [9].

2.2. Measurement of Ambiguity Tolerance (MAT)

A series of ambiguity tolerance measurements and assessment tests have been carried out in former studies. The pioneering studies of ambiguity tolerance measurements are based on empirical data [10]. According to Budner [11], the commonly accepted measurement is the 16-scale examination. Ely [12] put forward the Second Language Tolerance of Ambiguity Scale (TAS), which refers to a questionnaire to test the AT of ESL and EFL learners. In the current statistical study, TAS questionnaire items are rated on a five-point Likert Scale ranging from 1: strongly disagree to 5: strongly agree. SPSS is utilized to analyze the statistical data. The measurement includes computer-related hardware, software, programs, and the internet. A series of Structural Equation Model (SEM) tests prove the connection between AT and achievements in language learning. Hierarchical regression analyses confirm the potential effect of multilingualism, age, and language proficiency on ambiguity tolerance level [13]. We found some influential factors related to AT from prior studies based on MAT. We would identify the correlations through the following studies. Delicate and accurate MAT are indispensable in empirical studies to investigate the relationship between AT and other variables in the application of modern technologies for educational purposes.

2.3. Multilingualism

Multilingualism is operationally defined as the knowledge of more than one language but not necessarily proficiency in these languages. Multilingual speakers are anticipated to possess higher AT levels. Ambiguity tolerance positively relates to multilingualism, age, and linguistic variation [14]. Additionally, optimistic mental attitudes, multilingualism, and age could positively influence AT. Elderly people are prone to having the wisdom of life, which leads to a higher degree of AT [4,14,15]. According to sociolinguistics, language and culture are an inseparable whole. Multilingual speakers have learned languages and multicultural background knowledge simultaneously. In this case, multilingual speakers tend to have a mutual understanding of different situations. Furthermore, multilingualism and multicultural environment altogether exert a significant and positive influence on AT levels [16].

2.4. Self-Efficacy

Self-efficacy is operationally defined as a belief or confidence in whether learners can achieve successful learning outcomes [17,18,19]. In sustainable online language learning courses, freshmen tend to possess higher self-efficacy, motivation, and self-regulation levels, but these students possess insufficient information, preparation, and confidence [20]. Albantani et al. [20] carried out a study to help students better engage in the language learning environment. Achievements and motivation in academic learning exert a positive influence on self-efficacy. Conversely, anxiety, stress, and confusion negatively influence self-efficacy [21]. Technically, in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era, the wide use of social media tools leads to positive attitudes toward language learning. Using the social media tool Facebook helps stimulate students’ intrinsic motivation and thus affects self-efficacy and writing performance [22]. Former studies reported a positive correlation between self-efficacy and AT [4].

2.5. Engagement

Engagement in language learning contexts is operationally defined as instructors’ and students’ participation in pedagogical activities. Students’ engagement in language learning contexts involves how much time and effort they put into practice and the learning process. Learner engagement is a complex construction subdivided into behavioral, emotional, and social engagement [23]. Emotional engagement is the most basic of the three componential factors [24]. Emotional engagement affects learners’ belief in education, sense of belonging, peer assessment, and the omniscient role of their teachers. Social engagement is connected with social interactions and social activities. Social engagement mainly refers to the relationship between learners and teachers [25]. Students’ participation and dedication in the learning process are referred to as behavioral engagement [26]. Yu et al. [6] and Chu et al. [7] confirmed the interrelations between AT and engagement in the education context.

2.6. Motivation

Generally, motivation can be subdivided into internal and external motivation. External drive or motivation is operationally defined as learners’ aim to attain some outcomes through a series of activities. In comparison, internal drive or motivation refers to the activity of learners to obtain self-complement and self-satisfaction [27]. Students’ engagement in language learning contexts involves how much time and effort they put into practice and the learning process. Motivation, in this study, refers to the willingness to participate in language learning in the post-COVID-19 pandemic era. Motivation is operationally defined as learners’ internal drive to make progress in sustainable language education. McLain et al. [9] corroborated that ambiguity-tolerant people are motivated to share opinions with others.

2.7. Language Learning Outcomes

Learning outcomes are operationally defined as achievements in the language learning process. Different motivation levels lead to different learning outcomes in the second language learning process. At the same time, language learners’ self-motivation interrelates with achievements [25]. Blended learning becomes prevalent in the COVID-19 pandemic quarantine period. The added value of online blended learning is that it can boost learning outcomes compared to traditional learning. In addition, language learners possess positive and active attitudes toward blended learning [28]. Compared with conventional English language learning, in mobile-assisted language learning (MALL) contexts, learning motivation, learning strategies, and learning outcomes are significantly improved [29]. Language learning outcomes are greatly enhanced with the assistance of modern techniques in the post-pandemic era. Coupled with numerous advantages, contemporary communication approaches and mobile learning techniques are widely used in the educational area [30]. In addition, multimodal teaching is increasingly prevalent with the advancement of AI and 5G multimodal technology. The application of modern technology facilitates learning engagement and learning outcomes [29]. Several studies demonstrated that the personality trait AT is of paramount importance in strengthening learning outcomes [6,7].

2.8. Research Purposes and Questions

AT plays an indispensable role in language education. Thus, it is imperative to explore AT-correlated research frontiers through trend analysis and bibliometric analysis. Accordingly, we drill down several longest paths to further probe into the fundamental role of AT in sustainable language education. Based on the literature review, we propose eight Research Questions (RQs).
RQ1: What are the reasons for the rising trend of AT?
RQ2: What are the heated topics correlated with AT based on the frequency of occurrence?
RQ3: What are the top references, sources, authors, organizations, and countries among the studies on ambiguity tolerance in sustainable language learning?
RQ4: Can multilingualism promote ambiguity tolerance in language learning contexts?
RQ5: Can self-efficacy promote ambiguity tolerance in language learning contexts?
RQ6: Can engagement promote ambiguity tolerance in language learning contexts?
RQ7: Can ambiguity tolerance promote motivation in language learning contexts?
RQ8: Can ambiguity tolerance promote language learning outcomes?

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Literature Search Rationales

On 1 June 2023, the researchers collected data from 306 early published articles by keying in “tolerance of ambiguity” OR “ambiguity tolerance” on the Core Collection of Web of Science (WOS) and set a small corpus based on these data. Web of Science mainly consisted of six databases. We refined the databases to four by excluding two databases, i.e., Current Chemical Reactions (CCR-EXPANDED) and Index Chemicus (IC). The resource n = 306 results were collected from the Social Science Citation Index (SSCI), Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-Expanded), Arts and Humanities Citation Index (AHCI), Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Science (CPI-S), Conference Proceedings Citation Index-Social Science and Humanities (CPCI-SSH), and Emerging Sources Citation Index (ESCI) citation index databases from Web of Science Core Collection. The data-collecting process included several steps. Firstly, we searched related topics on WOS Core Collection by keying in “tolerance of ambiguity” OR “ambiguity tolerance”. Secondly, we set the time from the initial online databases to the first two seasons of 2023. Thirdly, we deleted online publications. Fourth, we extracted a plain text file of full records and cited references. Finally, based on bibliographic data, we drew visualization graphics to display the direct and indirect citation relations. Table 1 summarized the research procedures and research methods.
In the formal analysis, we further probed into the role of AT and its correlated variables. We searched on WOS Core Collection “tolerance of ambiguity” OR “ambiguity tolerance”, combining the keywords that are extracted from the longest path analysis on CitNetExplorer. We answered research questions to investigate the relationship between AT and multilingualism, self-efficacy, engagement, motivation, and their collaborative effect on learning outcomes.

3.2. Research Methodology

The current study adopted analytical software VOSviewer version 1.6.17 and CitNetExplorer version 1.0.0. The two software share commonalities in that they are utilized to transform numeric data into graphic mappings and to show bibliometric networks. The two software complement each other. CitNetExplorer shows individual publication information, while VOSviewer shows the graphic data as an aggregate whole [31]. The small corpus contains the aforementioned plain text file (n = 286) with early-access documents (n = 20) excluded. Early-access documents refer to those articles published ahead of print. After the acceptance of a journal article, the first process is early access, which means published ahead of print before it is collected by the Web of Science (WOS) Core Collection. This is because VOSviewer cannot read early-access data, due to technical bugs in accessing the data, i.e., null pointer exception, which refers to bugs in the execution of the programming process. CitNetExplorer can only read joi format data. The plain data file downloaded from WOS is in Text file (txt) format. Therefore, we changed the WOS data format from Txt to Journal of Informetrics (JOI) format by renomination of the file’s name with “.joi” at the end. The transformation of the data file type ensures the calculation process. The clustering techniques, including CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer, can transform plain numeric data into bibliographic visualizations. CitNetExplorer demonstrates the publication’s chronological arrangement. The researchers focus on the citation network, longest path, pioneering document, the most cited document, and the latest document. As for the content of the analysis, the related topics are grouped into one cluster, and each cluster is represented by a particular color on the visualization of publications created by CitNetExplorer. We made a short elaboration on the search procedures, research methods, and purposes in Table 1.

4. Results

4.1. RQ1: What Are the Reasons for the Rising Trend of AT?

Apart from the bibliometric analysis, Figure 1 a bar chart was created from the Web of Science to visualize the trend of publications and citations in accordance with the time span (see Figure 1). We excluded 20 early-access documents and obtained 286 results ranging from 2008 to 2023. The document types included articles (n = 273), meeting abstracts (n = 13), review articles (n = 12), editorial materials (n = 7), proceeding papers (n = 2), and letters (n = 1). We found that the total aggregations do not equal the number of articles. We thus made a further elaboration on this point. There are overlaps between the document types. We took the number of publications and citations on “ambiguity tolerance” (topic) as a whole, and we found that the trend appeared to display fluctuating growth. The number of publications achieved its peak in 2020. During that time, the globe was undergoing the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Citations on “ambiguity tolerance” (topic) demonstrate a rapid growth trend within the time window from 2008 to 2022. The number of citations displays fluctuating growth and reaches its peak in 2022, the year in which the globe stepped into the post-COVID-19 pandemic era. Another reason for the citation peak is that the calculation was carried out at the beginning of 2023. Partially, some recent publications are classified as early access, so they are not present on the graph. Moreover, publication and citation data are updated to 1 June 2023. The incomplete calculation is another reason for the citation peak achieved in 2022. Ambiguity tolerance has always been a heated topic in the post-pandemic era, so the citations of the topic demonstrate an upward trend. Additionally, the multidisciplinary studies concerning “ambiguity tolerance” (topic) are likewise increasing rapidly.
As is shown on WOS, the top 10 published categories on AT are listed as follows: Education Educational Research (n = 40), Psychology Multidisciplinary (n = 40), Education Scientific Disciplines (n = 30), Psychology Applied (n = 22), Management (n = 21), Business (n = 20), Linguistics (n = 18), Health Care Sciences Services (n = 17), Language Linguistics (n = 11), and Psychiatry (n = 11). The top 10 publication titles on AT, in other words, sources or journal names (Table 2), are listed as follows: Frontiers in Psychology (n = 10; SSCI), Academic Medicine (n = 8; SCIE), BMC Medical Education (n = 8; SSCI), Current Psychology (n = 8; SSCI), Journal of Career Assessment (n = 8; SSCI), International Journal of Psychology (n = 6; SSCI), Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development (n = 4; SSCI), Journal of Vocational Behavior (n = 4; SSCI), Personality and Individual Differences (n = 4; SSCI), and Sustainability (n = 4; SSCI). The results show that AT correlates with psychological factors and plays an indispensable role in language education. Surprisingly, AT is also widely discussed in the medical area and concerned with psychological therapy.
The sudden outbreak of the pandemic made people of all trades feel more pressure than ever before with increasing COVID-19 cases. During the lockdown period, people had to maintain social distancing and use 4G or 5G communication devices for video conferencing. In educational areas, distance education and distance learning became prevalent. The tremendous change in instruction methods from conventional offline language classrooms to intangible online courses led to educators’ and students’ decreased motivation [32]. In academic fields, scholars and researchers had time to analyze the psychological issues of post-pandemic trauma, such as stress, intolerance, cognitive overload, and burnout [6,33]. AT is referred to as a kind of positive personality trait that plays a significant role in coping with negative psychology [6,34]. Hence, there has been a notable increase in the number of scholarly works addressing the study of ambiguity tolerance in a range of multidisciplinary fields in response to the COVID-19 pandemic.

4.2. RQ2: What Are the Heated Topics Correlated with AT Based on the Frequency of Occurrence?

To determine the heated research topics related to “ambiguity tolerance” (topic), the researchers obtained 306 publications by keying in “tolerance of ambiguity” and “ambiguity tolerance” (topic) in the online database WOS Core Collection on 1 June 2023. Retrieval topics included “tolerance of ambiguity” and “ambiguity tolerance” (topic). We chose full records and cited references, excluding early publications, and then exported records to a plain text file. We set up a small database of plain file data by collecting and extracting publication data from the Web of Science. After inputting the statistical data into VOSviewer, a graph of the co-occurrence of author keywords was output. It is worth noting that the search topics are exactly the center of two clusters, and the core status of the two keywords is emphasized. Moreover, the influence of the topic keywords is shown in Figure 2. We chose co-occurrence as the analysis type, author keywords as the analysis unit, and full counting as the counting method. The size of the circle represents the times of keyword occurrence.
Keyword co-occurrence analysis was utilized to visualize the link strength between keywords in large data. Keyword co-occurrence analysis was the theoretical basis, and it can be combined with the co-occurrence of keywords function on VOSviewer. By analyzing the heated topics connected with ambiguity tolerance, we can grasp the research frontiers related to the topic. We set the minimum number of occurrences of a keyword as two. The outcome is that 102 items meet the threshold. There are 16 clusters, 318 links, and a total link strength of 423 on the visualization of the co-occurrence of author keywords (Figure 2). The top 20 keywords are ambiguity tolerance, tolerance of ambiguity, uncertainty, ambiguity, personality, medical students, career indecision, creativity, medical education, multilingualism, self-efficacy, career decision, circular economy, decision making, empathy, tolerance, well-being, emotional intelligence, factor analysis, and knowledge sharing. These words are widely discussed and closely connected with AT. Keyword co-occurrence analysis provides references for the interrelations between AT and its correlates.

4.3. RQ3: What Are the Top References, Sources, Authors, Organizations, and Countries among the Studies on Ambiguity Tolerance in Sustainable Language Learning?

This study conducted the bibliometric analysis using VOSviewer. We chose co-citation and citation as the analysis type, and reference, authors, sources, organizations, and countries as the analysis unit. Then, we obtained the top 10 documents, authors, organizations, and countries based on citations, and we also obtained the top 10 sources based on the number of documents. The overall documents are represented by the author’s first name in chronological order on CitNetExplorer visualization, while the bibliographic coupling of documents on VOSviewer is represented by the author’s first name and the publication year.
Since AT is an emerging research topic in the COVID-19 pandemic and post-pandemic era, the total number of documents on AT is relatively small. The citation network in Figure 3 created by CitNetExplorer not only displays the impact power of the earliest author but also shows the direct and indirect citation links among the authors in a detailed topic group. The current network includes 719 publications and 2959 citation links. The time span ranges from 1909 to 2023. All of the publications are represented by the author’s family name. These articles are concerned with “ambiguity tolerance” (topic).
The researchers set the minimum number of citations as 3 in order to analyze more documents. Seven clusters were identified. Due to the minimum size requirement, 40 publications do not belong to a cluster (minimum size = 3). We chose the number of publications to be shown in the citation network as 100: Group 1 (publications = 262), Group 2 (publications = 110), Group 3 (publications = 101), Group 4 (publications = 67), Group 5 (publications = 66), Group 6 (publications = 62), Group 7 (publications = 11). The theme of Group 1 is psychological factors. The theme of Group 2 is decision making. The theme of Group 3 is medical education. The theme of Group 4 is entrepreneurial intention. The theme of Group 5 is language learning. The theme of Group 6 is consumer marketing. The theme of Group 7 is concerned with application in the medical area. Aiming to explore the role of AT in sustainable language learning, our study mainly focuses on Groups 1, 2, and 5.
We obtained the top 10 co-cited references through co-citation analysis. The minimum number of citations of a cited reference was set as 3. Of the 12,266 cited references, 487 met the threshold. The top 10 co-cited references were Budner [11] (citations = 125, total link strength = 1602), Furnham [35] (citations = 62, total link strength = 940), Furnham [36] (citations = 51, total link strength = 695), Mclain [37] (citations = 48, total link strength = 686), Frenkelbrunswik [10] (citations = 42, total link strength = 665), Norton [38] (citations = 42, total link strength = 582), MacDonald [39] (citations = 39, total link strength = 493), Herman [40] (citations = 33, total link strength = 459), and Hu [41] (citations = 26, total link strength = 484). These references are among the most influential ones since they are co-cited by many documents.
We also obtained the top 10 co-cited authors through co-citation analysis. The minimum number of citations of an author was set as 6. Of the 9517 cited authors, 253 met the threshold. As is shown in Figure 4, the top 10 co-cited authors were Furnham (citations = 163, total link strength = 2885), Budner (citations = 127, total link strength = 2145), Xu (citations = 118, total link strength = 2890), Mclain (citations = 113, total link strength = 2042), Bandura (citations = 54, total link strength = 925), Dewaele (citations = 52, total link strength = 670), Frenkelbrunswik (citations = 48, total link strength = 982), Geller (citations = 44, total link strength = 833), Norton (citations = 42, total link strength = 582), and Gati (citations = 40, total link strength = 1117). These authors are the most influential ones since they are co-cited by the most documents. Their articles provide referential meaning for other authors to conduct similar studies. The size of the dots represents the number of publications and a thicker line means a stronger link. A co-citation network refers to two dots cited by the same document. A bibliographic coupling network refers to two dots citing the same document [31]. The numeric data show that Budner [11] and Furnham [35] are the top two cited documents, while the two authors are the top two cited authors. The third most co-cited author Xu is a prolific author with 12 documents on ambiguity tolerance (topic).
Some of the most co-cited authors also show a co-occurrence on the top of the citation network on CitNetExplorer. Author co-citation analysis (ACA) provides a way to analyze descriptive metadata of citation networks. ACA is the underlying theoretical framework of the visualization graphics of the co-citation of cited authors created by VOSviewer. ACA shows delicate and detailed citation networks. Through ACA, the author’s work with frontier research meanings can be selected [42]. CitNetExplorer puts emphasis on the individual differences of a particular publication. VOSviewer analyzes the overall publications and citation relations as a whole. Two effective software were utilized to visualize the citation network on this topic AT. A research article usually includes the author’s insights into the research background, research meaning, major findings, and future research directions [42]. The bibliometric coupling of co-cited authors shows the influential status of the top cited authors. The research topic and authors’ keywords can provide research direction by analyzing cooperation and connection between authors.
We also analyzed co-cited sources by selecting co-citation as the analysis type, and source as the unit of analysis. The minimum number of citations of a source was set as 10. Of the 5271 cited sources, 252 met the threshold. As is present in Figure 5, the top 10 co-cited sources were Journal of Vocational Behavior (citations = 279, total link strength = 9526), Journal of Personality and Social Psychology (citations = 239, total link strength = 11,349), Journal of Career Assessment (citations = 219, total link strength = 7591), Journal of Personality (citations = 208, total link strength = 7242), Personality and Individual Differences (citations = 196, total link strength = 7611), Academic Medicine (citations = 174, total link strength = 3534), Psychological Reports (citations = 155, total link strength = 5443), Journal of Applied Psychology (citations = 128, total link strength = 5382), Journal of Counseling Psychology (citations = 117, total link strength = 4705), and Journal of Cleaner Production (citations = 115, total link strength = 5510). The co-citation of cited sources on VOSviewer is different from the cited sources on WOS. From the co-citation source, we found that ambiguity tolerance was widely studied as a psychological factor.
Through citation analysis, we obtained the top 10 cited countries and organizations where ambiguity tolerance underwent explorations. The top 10 cited countries are shown in Figure 6, they are the USA, England, Germany, Canada, the Netherlands, the People’s Republic of China, Turkey, Italy, Spain, and Australia. The top 10 cited organizations can be found in Figure 7, they are New York University, The University of Regina, Oxford Brookes University, the University of Michigan, Chemnitz University of Technology, Arizona State University, Duke University, Harvard University, Maine Medical Center, and Florida State University. The citation number of countries is an overall calculation of organizations’ publications in one country. The USA is the country with the highest number of publications on this topic AT. The top cited 10 countries indicate that these countries are the developmental centers of ambiguity tolerance research.

4.4. RQ4: Can Multilingualism Promote Ambiguity Tolerance in Language Learning Contexts?

We drilled down Group 5, with 66 publications in the language learning context as is shown in Figure 8. We found the first longest path in Group 5 led by the earliest author Rubin [43], with all the publications discussing the influence of multilingualism on ambiguity tolerance. Rubin [43] regarded the capability to feel at ease toward uncertainty and vagueness as a good language-learning strategy. We mainly focused on the earliest document of Rubin [43], the most cited document [4] of Dewaele [5] with 89 citations, and the latest document of Wei [13]. The interconnections, including cooperation and citation between the earliest and the latest authors, can be seen from the citation network. Visualization of the citation network shows the impact power of the earliest author. All of the publications are under the influence of Rubin [43] and cite the viewpoints of the earliest author. In addition, the citation network displays the relatedness and interconnection between the authors as well. It is evident that multilingual and multicultural environments could exert a positive effect on ambiguity tolerance. AT is one of the essential properties of cross-cultural communication. Ambiguity-tolerant learners are competent in solving problems caused by cultural differences [44].
Academically, the knowledge of multiple languages could facilitate ambiguity tolerance and the effect is multidirectional, i.e., AT can also mutually influence multilingual ability [4]. Compared with monolingual and bilingual speakers, multilingual speakers tend to possess better AT. Moreover, the cultivation of AT lays less focus on multilingual family environments but emphasizes the oversea experience. Language learners with three months of oversea experience have a propensity for better AT. When the overseas experience is prolonged to a year or more, insignificant differences have been made in the effectiveness of AT [4]. Moreover, former studies report the influence of three factors on ambiguity tolerance. The research has been conducted under one particular context, i.e., English as a foreign language (EFL). In addition, there are some connections between gender, knowledge of languages, multilingualism, and AT [15]. Multilingual speakers are equipped with cross-cultural communication awareness. Thus, multilingual speakers usually exhibit better AT [4,14].

4.5. RQ5: Can Self-Efficacy Promote Ambiguity Tolerance in Language Learning Contexts?

To answer this research question, the researchers drilled down the multiple longest paths of six publications in the Group 5 language learning context, with the initial ones led by Bandura [17] and Bandura [18], respectively (See in Figure 9). The newest one is Storme [45]. The most cited document is Xu [46] with 56 citations. Self-efficacy is the theme of this longest path. Self-efficacy is a crucial mediator in deciding personal choices, objectives, and accomplishments [17]. Proficient learners tend to possess better self-efficacy, which refers to a sense of achievement in the learning process [18]. Self-efficacy can be interpreted as an essential indicator of successful experiences and fulfillment in the learning process [47]. Generally speaking, successful experiences strengthen the sense of achievement, confidence, motivation, and internal drive, which lead to higher self-efficacy [48]. Ambiguity-tolerant individuals excel at self-efficacy management [49].
In the language learning context, the interrelation of self-efficacy, self-regulation, decision-making capacity, and motivation leads to satisfactory learning outcomes. Self-efficacy plays a pivotal role in enhancing ambiguity tolerance. AT is a personality trait that remains constant and stable in different situations and different contexts [7]. Moreover, the mediating role of self-efficacy is proven in former studies. Specifically, self-efficacy serves as a crucial link between ambiguity tolerance and the capacity to make decisions [45]. Self-efficacy facilitates self-regulation in the completion of learning tasks and further indirectly influences learning outcomes [50]. Self-efficacy plays a mediator role, linking ambiguity tolerance and motivation deficiency, although the mediating effect is insignificant [46]. When given highly complex tasks, participants with higher ambiguity tolerance report higher self-efficacy and accuracy [3]. Ambiguity tolerance plays a crucial role in mediating the cause–effect relationship between knowledge self-efficacy and knowledge gaps [49]. AT intermediates the complex task and self-efficacy. In addition, ambiguity-tolerant learners with better self-efficacy perform better in tough task completion than those ambiguity-intolerant students [3].

4.6. RQ6: Can Ambiguity Tolerance Promote Engagement in Language Learning Contexts?

This longest path, led by Kamran [51], discusses AT’s role in influencing engagement in the Group 5 language learning context (see Figure 10). This longest path shows the peculiar citation network between Kamran [51] and Yang [34]. Yu et al. [6] proved the essential role of AT and perseverance in facilitating learners’ engagement in language learning contexts. The most recent publication by Yang [34] demonstrated that AT influences college teachers’ stress, cognitive overload, burnout, emotional intelligence, enthusiasm, and teaching engagement. Engagement refers to individuals’ time, effort, and energy put into sustainable language learning. Academic engagement could be subdivided into teachers’ work engagement and students’ learning engagement. According to Yu et al. [6], in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era, curriculum designers, academics, and instructors strive to enhance learning engagement to maintain online education. The foundational effects of ambiguity tolerance and perseverance on learners’ engagement are also proven [6].
Ambiguity tolerance could enhance learning engagement in academic settings. According to Chu et al. [7], high AT is essential to second language competence and language learning strategies in the SLL context. Ambiguity-tolerant students are motivated to play an active role in classroom settings, and learning engagement is improved correspondingly [6]. In contrast, ambiguity intolerance hinders engagement and participation. Ambiguity-intolerant people also try to avoid ambiguous and intricate situations in the future [33]. Learners from ambiguity-intolerant cultures are easily frightened and threatened in a complex learning environment. Thus, ambiguity-intolerant students are timid, silenced, alienated, and less motivated to participate in online language learning courses [52].
Cultivating engagement in a sustainable language learning context involves both the teachers’ and students’ efforts. It is essential to discuss the correlates. Experience is another factor in enhancing teachers’ work engagement and AT. In EFL contexts, Yang’s [34] study corroborated that emotionally intelligent and ambiguity-tolerant teachers are skillful at language teaching, which is referred to as teachers’ career engagement. Ambiguity-tolerant teachers are more engaged in innovative teaching methodologies [34]. It is worth noting that AT and engagement mutually influence each other [34]. Ambiguity-tolerant educators and practitioners are passionate about teaching. Engagement in the arts and relevant activities could increase AT levels and alleviate students’ burnout [53]. Apart from AT, the emotional quotient (EQ) is also positively relevant to learning engagement [34]. In the adaption of AI technology, AT is empirically confirmed as an important variation in technology acceptance models (TAMs) [54]. It is also proved that AT acts as a moderator linking conversational hints with social presence. Ambiguity-tolerant learners actively engage in the application of chatbots and consequently strengthen their social presence [54]. AT is an indispensable quality in the adaptation of the coming challenges in the prevalent AI era. AT individuals are willing to embrace the changes to engage in the learning environment.

4.7. RQ7: Can Ambiguity Tolerance Promote Motivation in Language Learning Contexts?

We investigate the longest path between Macdoald [39] and Hancock [2] in Figure 11. The theme of this longest path is that personality trait AT positively correlates with motivation in language learning [55]. The pioneering study, led by Macdonald [39], put up a refined and revised scale to measure different degrees of AT. The latest study on this longest path is Hancock [2] who proves the connection between AT and mental health and provides references for getting rid of stress. In spite of different languages, ambiguity-tolerant language learners possess higher motivation. Statistics show that learners from a cultural context where most people tolerate ambiguous phenomena have strong incentives to participate in the learning task. Ambiguity-tolerant people are motivated to share knowledge in complex task completion due to their willingness to take challenges [56].
Ambiguity-tolerant learners have strong motivation to share opinions and engage in the language learning process. On the one hand, ambiguity-tolerant students are brave enough to try new things. They are more active, extroverted, and motivated to speak without fear of tongue slips. They tend to forebear the differences in the language learning process. Ambiguity-tolerant learners have a propensity of being unrestricted by rules and regulations, so they are not afraid of making mistakes [52]. On the other hand, ambiguity-tolerant people possess easygoing characteristics. They are amiable, amicable, and trustworthy, so they have the intention and strong motivation to share knowledge with others [9]. It is feasible to investigate the relationships between AT and motivation in order to provide suggestions for better learning outcomes.

4.8. RQ8: Can Ambiguity Tolerance Promote Language Learning Outcomes?

This longest path is led by Budner [11] and all the studies investigate the role of AT in facilitating language learning outcomes in Figure 12. AT exerts a positive influence on learning efficiency and task completion and further improves learning outcomes. AT can influence learning efficiency and effectiveness when language learners encounter uncertain new words [13,57]. Ambiguity-tolerant people have the courage to try new things. They also have a disposition to take risks in the changes with willingness and readiness [7,9]. AT is a reflection of psychological conditions, which provides new perspectives to utilize the influential factors in language learning. The study of AT could help learners eliminate anxiety, stress, psychological disorder, and burnout so that language learners could immerse themselves in the learning environment [2]. Even in complex language learning contexts, AT undeniably influences successful learning outcomes [52].
AT is endowed with multiple functions to improve learning outcomes. Ambiguity-tolerant students are excellent learners because they possess the ability to ignore unfamiliar words and guess the meanings of the unknown words from the discourse context to grasp the main idea from the whole article [7]. AT is positively linked to a creative mind in the learning process [58]. Ambiguity-tolerant learners are good at mutual understanding, which leads to successful communication. They try all means to convey meaning and make themselves understood by the listeners. In an SLL context, AT is relevant to language competence. Ambiguity-tolerant students dare to talk with native speakers without fear of making mistakes [7]. In addition, ambiguity-tolerant students play an active role in online language learning courses [52]. Active participation would definitely lead to positive and satisfactory learning outcomes [7]. Enhanced AT is beneficial for learners to build up confidence even if they run into difficulties in the language learning process [59]. In addition, language learners with higher AT make efforts to communicate confidently in incomprehensible foreign language contexts [59].
The contributions of AT to learning outcomes provide pedagogical guidance for both teachers and students. On the one hand, language learners should tolerate ambiguity in order to achieve better learning outcomes. On the other hand, it is feasible for EFL educators to test students’ psychological conditions and provide practical assistance to them according to different degrees of the personality trait AT, and resilience [6]. AT-deficient online learners depend on teachers’ assistance to adapt to ambiguous settings [52]. Learners with high AT and motivation demand less on first language assistance [55]. Teachers’ assistance includes helping ambiguity-intolerant students deal with the nuance of ambiguities between first and second languages by providing cultural background knowledge beforehand.

5. Discussion

5.1. Suggestions from Bibliometric Analysis

Significant changes have taken place in the COVID-19 pandemic and post-pandemic era. RQ1 explains the reasons for the upsurging trend of AT-related studies. RQ2 also lists the top 20 keywords centered on AT. Through trend analysis, we find that the study of AT demonstrates upward growth. The quantitative distribution of publications and citations shows the popularity of AT-related studies. Through keyword co-occurrence analysis, we find AT-correlated keywords and emerging topics in the post-pandemic era. The bibliometric visualizations on VOSviewer summarize the top cited references, authors, organizations, and countries of AT-related studies. Through citation network analysis and visualization on CitNetExplorer, we drill down the longest paths in the language learning context and raise research questions. We reach conclusions by answering the research questions. In conclusion, our study reveals that multilingualism, self-efficacy, motivation, and engagement are positively relevant to AT and collaboratively promote learning outcomes in sustainable language education.
Author co-citation analysis (ACA) is the theoretical framework, while the co-citation of cited authors on VOSviewer is an application of the theory through visualization. It is an analytical software that transforms numeric data into visualized graphs. The most co-cited authors provide a collection of documents with profound referential values. RQ3 focuses on mapping knowledge domain (MKD) analysis and bibliometric analysis on ambiguity tolerance (topic). MKD is the theoretical basis of the citation and co-citation analysis of cited authors, references, organizations, sources, and countries on VOSviewer. MKD analysis has been applied to multiple disciplines [60]. In this study, we apply keyword co-occurrence analysis to determine the research trend and the emerging topics related to AT in the post-pandemic era. Some authors show a co-occurrence in different visualizations, which suggests the referential meaning of these authors’ publications.

5.2. AT and Its Correlates

RQ4 and RQ5 corroborate the influence of multilingual ability and self-efficacy on AT. In sustainable language education, learners should tolerate ambiguity and cultural differences in order to achieve better learning outcomes. On the contrary, successive sufferings of failure negatively and significantly influence self-efficacy. Since the expectation of learning achievements and results is relatively high, learners may probably fulfill their learning ambitions. On the contrary, continuous sufferings of failure lead to cognitive overload. In this case, the learning outcomes turn out to be disappointing and unsatisfactory [48]. Therefore, language learners should build up confidence and learn from failures. RQ6 and RQ7 prove the mediating role of AT in facilitating engagement and motivation. Engagement involves both educators’ and students’ participation. Ambiguity-tolerant people are motivated to share knowledge with others and thus can better engage in the educational scene. In the second language learning (SLL) process, ambiguity-tolerant learners are motivated learners with a strong desire for first-language support, which is one aspect of learning engagement [4].

5.3. The Rationales for AT in the Promotion of Learning Outcomes

The results indicate the positive role of high AT levels. The present study attempts to explore the significance of AT in sustainable language education. Language learning outcomes can be significantly enhanced due to participants’ active engagement. In addition, multilingual ability, self-efficacy, motivation, and engagement are positively relevant to ambiguity tolerance and collectively improve learning outcomes. AT is conducive to building positive psychology. AT significantly correlates with scholarly interest, acceptance of the changes, confidence, extraversion, and affirmation in interactive activities [61]. Studies on AT under language learning contexts will emphasize the combination of modern technology, for example, metaverse platforms and psychological factors, to facilitate teaching and learning outcomes [62]. In addition, teachers’ affirmation and encouragement greatly help to enhance learners’ self-efficacy.

5.4. Challenges of AT

Although numerous studies support the effectiveness of AT on language learning outcomes, challenges should be addressed to sustain language learning in the post-pandemic era. It is necessary to place the destructive effects of AT. In reading comprehension, ambiguity-tolerant people show much ignorance toward unfamiliar and unknown words. They tend to skip strange and obscure words and grasp the text’s central idea, which hinders the possibility of learning new words. In contrast, ambiguity-intolerant students have better vocabulary learning outcomes [63]. Ambiguity intolerance hinders language learners’ adaptation to ambiguous learning environments [64]. Under this circumstance, ambiguity-intolerant students have difficulties ignoring these unfamiliar and unknown words. Instead, they would dedicate themselves to determining their meanings and eradicating ambiguous cognition phenomena [65]. Therefore, students with lower AT perform unexpectedly well in reading comprehension in the computer-assisted language learning (CALL) process [63]. In most cases, ambiguity intolerance hinders the ability to maintain social connections and the ability to deal with ambiguous environments. Holistically, the negligible negative effects of AT on vocabulary learning could be ignored.

6. Conclusions

6.1. Major Findings

This research makes a contribution to studies on AT by delineating the collaborative effects of AT-correlated factors on language learning outcomes. Our study leads to the following findings through trend analysis and bibliometric analysis. First, in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era, there is a rising trend of studies to analyze post-pandemic trauma and positive psychological factors in maintaining sustainable language learning. This study explores the references, sources, and authors related to the personality trait AT. The bibliometric analysis implies that AT is an emerging research frontier in different domains in the post-pandemic era. Second, it is noteworthy that influential factors, including multilingualism, motivation, self-efficacy, engagement, and learning outcomes, are systematically interrelated with ambiguity tolerance. The strong citation links on the keyword co-occurrence map on VOSviewer prove the influential relationship between AT and other elements. Third, the findings of the current study echo previous findings that depict the collective effects of AT correlates on language learning outcomes [13,52,57]. Overall, the findings of the current study provide some theoretical, empirical, and pedagogical implications for strengthening sustainable language education in the post-pandemic era.

6.2. Limitations

The source limitation is that AT is an emerging research frontier in the COVID-19 pandemic and post-pandemic era. Thus, the total number of prior studies is insufficient. The references are confined to one database, Web of Science (WOS), due to the limitation of library sources. Another limitation is that our study lacks empirical statistics to validate the relations between AT and its correlates.

6.3. Future Research Directions

The results may enlighten educators to help language learners strengthen AT levels. AT should be added to the course design in pedagogical areas to facilitate and enhance learning outcomes [7]. The correlates need further attention to optimize the positive effect of AT on language learning outcomes. The theoretical model of uncertainty tolerance provides insightful suggestions for pedagogical areas and other disciplines [66]. Educators could assist language learners to strengthen confidence, motivation, engagement, and self-efficacy to lift AT levels. The interdisciplinary study of AT and the emerging frontiers in the post-pandemic era have profound research meanings. In the future, we will continue focusing on the study of AT and explore the multidisciplinary and multidimensional research meanings. This study aims to provide references to cultivate ambiguity tolerance and facilitate learning outcomes to sustain language education in the COVID-19 post-pandemic era. Future research needs exquisite experiments to test the breadth and depth of ambiguity and its relevant factors. Meanwhile, more confined measurements require further specification.
To enhance generalizability, future research could adopt various types of analysis to explore AT and learning outcomes in sustainable language learning, including SEM, regression analysis, meta-analysis, and systemic review. The new decade witnesses the new era of spatial computing. Immersive technologies encompass Virtual Reality (VR), Augmented Reality (AR), Mixed Reality (MR), Extended Reality (XR), and metaverse platforms [62,67,68,69]. The technical composition of immersive technologies includes AI chatbots, ChatGPT, VR goggles, headsets, headphones, the Apple Vision Pro, and so on [54,67,68,69,70,71]. The perceived ease of use (PEOU) of immersive technology is that it could simulate relaxing and comfortable learning atmospheres [68,69]. AT is empirically confirmed as a significant variable in technology acceptance models (TAMs) for the adoption of AI technologies [72,73]. Future research could combine empirical methods to investigate the function of AT in utilizing advanced technologies by extending the Technology Acceptance Model (TAM) by adding the personality attribute AT. Future research could study AT’s role in the adaptation of immersive technology in pedagogical areas, for example, the application of VR equipment to enhance multimodal literacy [74].

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.X.; Methodology, Y.X.; Software, Y.X.; Validation, Y.X.; Formal Analysis, Y.X.; Investigation, Y.X.; Resources, Y.X.; Data Curation, Y.X.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation, Y.X.; Writing—Review and Editing, Y.X.; Visualization, Y.X.; Supervision, Z.Y.; Project Administration, Z.Y.; Funding Acquisition, Z.Y. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This work is supported by the 2019 MOOC of Beijing Language and Culture University (MOOC201902) (Important) “Introduction to Linguistics”; “Introduction to Linguistics” of online and offline mixed courses in Beijing Language and Culture University in 2020; Special fund of Beijing Co-construction Project-Research and reform of the “Undergraduate Teaching Reform and Innovation Project” of Beijing higher education in 2020-innovative “multilingual +” excellent talent training system (202010032003); and the research project of Graduate Students of Beijing Language and Culture University “Xi Jinping: The Governance of China” (SJTS202108); Key Research and Application Project of the Key Laboratory of Key Technologies for Localization Language Services of the State Administration of Press and Publication, “Research on Localization and Intelligent Language Education Technology for the ‘Belt and Road Initiative” (Project Number: CSLS 20230012).

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The researchers would like to extend their gratitude to anonymous reviewers and funds that financially supported this research. The researchers sincerely appreciate the constructive and thorough feedback provided by editors and reviewers. The first author wants to show her reliance, dependence, and gratefulness to Distinguished Yu Zhonggen for his guidance, supervision, and company during the writing process. The first author also wants to express her special gratitude to her dearest supervisor Liu Linjun, beloved family, and kind friends who supported her all the time.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Hammond, J.A.; Hancock, J.; Martin, M.S.; Jamieson, S.; Mellor, D.J. Development of a New Scale to Measure Ambiguity Tolerance in Veterinary Students. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2017, 44, 38–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  2. Hancock, J.; Mattick, K. Tolerance of Ambiguity and Psychological Well-Being in Medical Training: A Systematic Review. Med. Educ. 2020, 54, 125–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Endres, M.L.; Chowdhury, S.; Milner, M. Ambiguity tolerance and accurate assessment of self-efficacy in a complex decision task. J. Manag. Organ. 2009, 15, 31–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Lowe, R.J. Selected poster presentations from the British Association of Applied Linguistics conference, Manchester Metropolitan University, UK, August 2019: Exploring ideology in ELT: A frame analysis approach. Lang. Teach. 2020, 53, 383–386. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Dewaele, J.M.; Li, W. Is multilingualism linked to a higher tolerance of ambiguity? Biling 2013, 16, 231–240. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Yu, M.; Wang, H.; Xia, G. The Review on the Role of Ambiguity of Tolerance and Resilience on Students’ Engagement. Front. Psychol. 2022, 12, 828894. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Chu, W.H.; Lin, D.Y.; Chen, T.Y.; Tsai, P.S.; Wang, C.H. The relationships between ambiguity tolerance, learning strategies, and learning Chinese as a second language. System 2015, 49, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Li, H.; He, Q. Ambiguity tolerance and perceptual learning styles of Chinese EFL learners. Engl. Lang. Teach. 2016, 9, 213–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. McLain, D.L.; Kefallonitis, E.; Armani, K. Ambiguity tolerance in organizations: Definitional clarification and perspectives on future research. Front. Psychol. 2015, 6, 344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Frenkel-Brunswik, E. Intolerance of ambiguity as an emotional and perceptual personality variable. J. Pers. 1949, 18, 108–143. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Budner, S. Intolerance of Ambiguity as a Personality Variable. J. Pers. 1962, 30, 29–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Ely, C.M. Tolerance of ambiguity and use of second language strategies. FLA 1989, 22, 437–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wei, R.; Kang, Y.; Wang, S. The relationship between tolerance of ambiguity and multilingualism revisited. System 2022, 107, 102798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. van Compernolle, R.A. Are multilingualism, tolerance of ambiguity, and attitudes toward linguistic variation related? Int. J. Multiling. 2016, 13, 61–73. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Wei, R.; Hu, Y. Exploring the relationship between multilingualism and tolerance of ambiguity: A survey study from an EFL context. Biling 2019, 22, 1209–1219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Dewaele, J.M.; Wei, L. Attitudes towards code-switching among adult mono- and multilingual language users. J. Multiling. Multicult. Dev. 2014, 35, 235–251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  17. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychol. Rev. 1977, 84, 191–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Bandura, A. Self-efficacy mechanism in human agency. Am. Psychol. 1982, 37, 122–147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Bandura, A. Self-Efficacy: The Exercise of Control. J. Cogn. Psychother. 1997, 13, 158–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Albantani, A.M.; Madkur, A.; Rahmadi, I.F. Agency in online foreign language learning amidst the COVID-19 outbreak. Turk. Online J. Distance Educ. 2022, 23, 196–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Cho, M.H.; Kim, Y.; Choi, D. The effect of self-regulated learning on college students’ perceptions of community of inquiry and affective outcomes in online learning. Internet High. Educ. 2017, 34, 10–17. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Alberth. Use of Facebook, Students’ Intrinsic Motivation to Study Writing, Writing Self-Efficacy and Writing Performance. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2019, 28, 21–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Rangvid, B.S. Student Engagement in Inclusive Classrooms. Educ. Econ. 2018, 26, 266–284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Henry, A.; Thorsen, C. Disaffection and agentic engagement: ‘Redesigning’ activities to enable authentic self-expression. Lang. Teach. Res. 2020, 24, 456–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Alamer, A.; Alrabai, F. The causal relationship between learner motivation and language achievement: New dynamic perspective. Appl. Linguist. 2022, 44, 148–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Shappie, A.T.; Debb, S.M. African American student achievement and the historically Black University: The role of student engagement. Curr. Psychol. 2019, 38, 1649–1661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Ryan, R.M.; Deci, E.L. Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemp. Educ. Psych. 2000, 25, 54–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Yu, Z.; Xu, W.; Sukjairungwattana, P. Meta-analyses of differences in blended and traditional learning outcomes and students’ attitudes. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 926947. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Yu, Z.; Yu, L.; Xu, Q.; Xu, W.; Wu, P. Effects of mobile learning technologies and social media tools on student engagement and learning outcomes of English learning. Technol. Pedagog. Educ. 2022, 31, 381–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Yu, Z.; Yi, H. Acceptance and effectiveness of rain classroom in linguistics classes. Int. J. Mob. Blended Learn. 2020, 12, 77–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Van Eck, N.J.; Waltman, L. Citation-based clustering of publications using CitNetExplorer and VOSviewer. Scientometrics 2017, 111, 1053–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  32. Yu, Z. Sustaining Student Roles, Digital Literacy, Learning Achievements, and Motivation in Online Learning Environments during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Sustainability 2022, 14, 4388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Xu, J.A.; Ba, Y. Coping with Students’ Stress and Burnout: Learners’ Ambiguity of Tolerance. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 842113. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Yang, N. An Investigation into the Interplay between Chinese EFL Teachers’ Emotional Intelligence, Ambiguity Tolerance, and Work Engagement. Front. Psychol. 2022, 13, 929933. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Furnham, A.; Ribchester, T. Tolerance of Ambiguity: A Review of the Concept, Its Measurement and Applications. Curr. Psychol. 1995, 14, 179–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Furnham, A.; Richards, S.C.; Paulhus, D.L. The Dark Triad of personality: A 10 year review. Soc. Personal. Psychol. Compass 2013, 7, 199–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. McLain, D.L. Evidence of the properties of an ambiguity tolerance measure: The multiple stimulus types ambiguity tolerance scale–II (MSTAT–II). Psychol. Rep. 2009, 105, 975–988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Norton, R.W. Measurement of Ambiguity Tolerance. J. Pers. Assess. 1975, 39, 607–619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. MacDonald, A.P., Jr. Revised Scale for Ambiguity Tolerance: Reliability. Psychol. Rep. 1970, 26, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Herman, J.L.; Stevens, M.J.; Bird, A.; Mendenhall, M.; Oddou, G. The tolerance for ambiguity scale: Towards a more refined measure for international management research. Int. J. Intercult. Relat. 2010, 34, 58–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Hu, L.; Bentler, P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct. Equ. Model. 1999, 6, 1–55. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Bu, Y.; Liu, T.Y.; Huang, W.B. MACA: A modified author co-citation analysis method combined with general descriptive metadata of citations. Scientometrics 2016, 108, 143–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Rubin, J. What the “Good Language Learner” Can Teach Us. TESOL Q. 1975, 9, 41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Chu, W.H. Empirical Research on Teaching Chinese Culture to Second Language Learners with an Emphasis on Intercultural Communication and Second Culture Acquisition; National Taiwan Normal University Press: Taipei, Taiwan, 2013. [Google Scholar]
  45. Storme, M.; Celik, P.; Myszkowski, N. Career Decision Ambiguity Tolerance and Career Decision-Making Difficulties in a French Sample: The Mediating Role of Career Decision Self-Efficacy. J. Career Assess. 2019, 27, 273–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Xu, H.; Tracey, T.J.G. Ambiguity Tolerance with Career Indecision: An Examination of the Mediation Effect of Career Decision-Making Self-Efficacy. J. Career Assess. 2015, 23, 519–532. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Robbins, S.B.; Lauver, K.; Le, H.; Davis, D.; Langley, R.; Carlstrom, A. Do Psychosocial and Study Skill Factors Predict College Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis. Psychol. Bull. 2004, 130, 261–288. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  48. Murphy, G.; Groeger, J.A.; Greene, C.M. Twenty Years of Load Theory-Where Are We Now, and Where Should We Go Next? Psychon. Bull. Rev. 2016, 23, 1316–1340. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Ravindran, S.; Iyer, G.S. Organizational and knowledge management related antecedents of knowledge use: The moderating effect of ambiguity tolerance. Inf. Technol. Manag. 2014, 15, 271–290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Doo, M.Y.; Bonk, C.J. The effects of self-efficacy, self-regulation, and social presence on learning engagement in a large university class using flipped Learning. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2020, 36, 997–1010. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Kamran, S.K.; Maftoon, P. An Analysis of the Associations between Ambiguity Tolerance and EFL Reading Strategy Awareness. Engl. Lang. Teach. 2012, 5, 188–196. [Google Scholar]
  52. Tapanes, M.A.; Smith, G.G.; White, J.A. Cultural Diversity in Online Learning: A Study of the Perceived Effects of Dissonance in Levels of Individualism/Collectivism and Tolerance of Ambiguity. Internet High. Educ. 2009, 12, 26–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. He, B.; Prasad, S.; Higashi, R.T.; Goff, H.W. The art of observation: A qualitative analysis of medical students’ experiences. BMC Med. Educ. 2019, 19, 234. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Jiang, Y.; Yang, X.; Zheng, T. Make chatbots more adaptive: Dual pathways linking human-like cues and tailored response to trust in interactions with chatbots. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2023, 138, 107485. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Joyce, P.; von Dietze, H.; von Dietze, A.; McMillan, B. Selected poster presentations from the British Association of Applied Linguistics conference, Manchester Metropolitan University, August 2019: Desire for L1 support in the English as a foreign classroom: Exploring connections with L2 proficiency, L2 ambiguity tolerance, L2 learning motivation, and gender. Lang. Teach. 2020, 53, 387–390. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Dahlin, K.B.; Chuang, K.; Roulet, T.J. Opportunity, motivation, and ability to learn from Failures and errors: Review, synthesis, and ways to move forward. Acad. Manag. Ann. 2018, 12, 252–277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  57. Erten, İ.H.; Topkaya, E.Z. Understanding tolerance of ambiguity of EFL learners in reading classes at tertiary level. Novitas-ROYAL (Res. Youth Lang.) 2009, 3, 29–44. [Google Scholar]
  58. Nicotera, A.M.; Smilowitz, M.; Pearson, J.C. Ambiguity tolerance, conflict management style and argumentativeness as predictors of innovativeness. Commun. Res. Rep. 1990, 7, 125–131. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Wang, Y.; Derakhshan, A.; Zhang, L.J. Researching and practicing positive psychology in second/foreign language learning and teaching: The past, current status and future directions. Front. Psychol. 2021, 12, 731721. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Shi, J.G.; Miao, W.; Si, H. Visualization and Analysis of Mapping Knowledge Domain of Urban Vitality Research. Sustainability 2019, 11, 988. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  61. Jach, H.K.; Smillie, L.D. To fear or fly to the unknown: Tolerance for ambiguity and Big Five personality traits. J. Res. Pers. 2019, 79, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  62. Li, M.; Yu, Z. A systematic review on the metaverse-based blended English learning. Front. Psychol. 2019, 13, 1087508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Chang, Y.H. The effect of ambiguity tolerance on learning English with computer-mediated dictionaries. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2020, 33, 960–981. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tynan, M. Multidimensional Tolerance of Ambiguity: Construct Validity, Academic Success, and Workplace Outcomes. Ph.D. Thesis, Iowa State University, Ames, IA, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Nishino, T. Beginning to read extensively: A case study with Mako and Fumi. Read. Foreign Lang. 2007, 19, 76. Available online: https://hdl.handle.net/10125/66807 (accessed on 15 June 2023).
  66. Hillen, M.A.; Gutheil, C.M.; Strout, T.D.; Smets, E.M.A.; Han, P.K.J. Tolerance of uncertainty: Conceptual analysis, integrative model, and implications for healthcare. Soc. Sci. Med. 2017, 180, 62–75. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Handa, M.; Aul, E.G.; Bajaj, S. Immersive technology–uses, challenges and opportunities. Int. J. Comput. Bus. Res. 2012, 6, 1–11. [Google Scholar]
  68. Suh, A.; Prophet, J. The state of immersive technology research: A literature analysis. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2018, 86, 77–90. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Chen, C.; Yuan, Y. Effectiveness of Virtual Reality on Chinese as a second language vocabulary learning: Perceptions from international students. Comput. Assist. Lang. Learn. 2023, 1–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Wu, R.; Yu, Z. Do AI chatbots improve students learning outcomes? Evidence from a meta-analysis. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2023, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Yu, Z. Meta-analyses of effects of augmented reality on educational outcomes over a decade. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2023, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Warner, J.A.; Koufteros, X.; Verghese, A. Learning computerese: The role of second language learning aptitude in technology acceptance. Educ. Psychol. Meas. 2014, 74, 991–1017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Kwon, Y.; Kim, J.Y.; Keane, A. The structural relationship among career-related mentoring, ambiguity tolerance, and job search effort and behavior of Korean college students. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8834. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Niu, L. Analysis of multimodal teaching of college English under the background of artificial intelligence. Secur. Commun. Netw. 2022, 3833106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Sustainability 15 11886 g001
Figure 1. Quantitative distributions of publication trend on ambiguity tolerance.
Figure 1. Quantitative distributions of publication trend on ambiguity tolerance.
Sustainability 15 11886 g001
Sustainability 15 11886 g002
Figure 2. Co-occurrence of author keywords.
Figure 2. Co-occurrence of author keywords.
Sustainability 15 11886 g002
Sustainability 15 11886 g003
Figure 3. Visualization of citation networks of the publications.
Figure 3. Visualization of citation networks of the publications.
Sustainability 15 11886 g003
Sustainability 15 11886 g004
Figure 4. Visualization of co-cited authors.
Figure 4. Visualization of co-cited authors.
Sustainability 15 11886 g004
Sustainability 15 11886 g005
Figure 5. Visualization of co-cited source journals.
Figure 5. Visualization of co-cited source journals.
Sustainability 15 11886 g005
Sustainability 15 11886 g006
Figure 6. Visualization of cited countries.
Figure 6. Visualization of cited countries.
Sustainability 15 11886 g006
Sustainability 15 11886 g007
Figure 7. Visualization of cited organizations.
Figure 7. Visualization of cited organizations.
Sustainability 15 11886 g007
Sustainability 15 11886 g008
Figure 8. Visualization of the longest path led by Rubin [43].
Figure 8. Visualization of the longest path led by Rubin [43].
Sustainability 15 11886 g008
Sustainability 15 11886 g009
Figure 9. Visualization of the multiple longest paths led by Bandura [17,19].
Figure 9. Visualization of the multiple longest paths led by Bandura [17,19].
Sustainability 15 11886 g009
Sustainability 15 11886 g010
Figure 10. Visualization of the multiple longest paths led by Kamran [51].
Figure 10. Visualization of the multiple longest paths led by Kamran [51].
Sustainability 15 11886 g010
Sustainability 15 11886 g011
Figure 11. Visualization of the longest path led by MacDonald [39].
Figure 11. Visualization of the longest path led by MacDonald [39].
Sustainability 15 11886 g011
Sustainability 15 11886 g012
Figure 12. Visualization of the longest path led by Budner [11].
Figure 12. Visualization of the longest path led by Budner [11].
Sustainability 15 11886 g012
Table 1. Research procedures and methodology.
Table 1. Research procedures and methodology.
ProceduresMethodsPurposes
Literature searchWeb of Science (WOS) To retrieve valuable studies related to AT
Visualization“Citation Report” on WOSTo conduct trend analyses of publications and citations
Data CurationVOSviewerTo show the heated topics and the top references, sources, authors, organizations, and countries among AT-relevant studies
Answering research questionsCitNetExplorerTo explore the role of AT and its correlates in enhancing language learning outcomes
Implications of the resultsDiscussion and conclusionTo present research meanings and provide empirical implications for sustainable language learning in the post-pandemic era
Table 2. The top 10 publication sources on AT.
Table 2. The top 10 publication sources on AT.
Journal NamesDocumentsIndexing
Frontiers in Psychology10SSCI
Academic Medicine8SCIE
BMC Medical Education8SSCI
Current Psychology8SSCI
Journal of Career Assessment8SSCI
International Journal of Psychology6SSCI
Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development4SSCI
Journal of Vocational Behavior4SSCI
Personality and Individual Differences4SSCI
Sustainability4SSCI
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Xue, Y.; Yu, Z. Bibliometric Analysis of Ambiguity Tolerance: Unearthing Its Role in Sustainable Language Education. Sustainability 2023, 15, 11886. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511886

AMA Style

Xue Y, Yu Z. Bibliometric Analysis of Ambiguity Tolerance: Unearthing Its Role in Sustainable Language Education. Sustainability. 2023; 15(15):11886. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511886

Chicago/Turabian Style

Xue, Yi, and Zhonggen Yu. 2023. "Bibliometric Analysis of Ambiguity Tolerance: Unearthing Its Role in Sustainable Language Education" Sustainability 15, no. 15: 11886. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511886

APA Style

Xue, Y., & Yu, Z. (2023). Bibliometric Analysis of Ambiguity Tolerance: Unearthing Its Role in Sustainable Language Education. Sustainability, 15(15), 11886. https://doi.org/10.3390/su151511886

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop