This paper examines error gravity research design and its theoretical
assumptions. Based on an analysis of 28 error gravity investigations (
1977-1995), we study several aspects of error gravity research design
(including, e.g., the authenticity of language sample), and theoretica
l constructs (such as the definition of ''error''). The study demonstr
ates that investigators have only skimmed the surface of the process o
f error evaluation, which is undoubtedly shaped by extralinguistic fac
tors. We conclude that researchers should reconceptualize error gravit
y research and should reassess earlier studies to confirm or disaffirm
their stated outcomes.