Hostname: page-component-6587cd75c8-cpvbf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-04-24T02:57:58.795Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual adults*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 November 2011

ELLEN BIALYSTOK  and
GIGI LUK
ELLEN BIALYSTOK*
Affiliation:
York University
GIGI LUK
Affiliation:
Harvard Graduate School of Education
*
Address for correspondence: Ellen Bialystok, Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

English receptive vocabulary scores from 797 monolingual and 808 bilingual participants between the ages of 17 and 89 years old were aggregated from 20 studies to compare standard scores across language groups. The distribution of scores was unimodal for both groups but the mean score was significantly different, with monolinguals obtaining higher standard scores than bilinguals. Consistent with previous research, older adults had higher vocabulary scores than younger adults. The results are discussed in terms of the implications for theoretical conceptions of linguistic processing and clinical diagnosis in bilingual populations.

Keywords

receptive vocabularyadult bilingualslinguistic performance
Type
Research Notes
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 2 , April 2012 , pp. 397 - 401
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2011

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

Footnotes

*

This work was partially supported by grant A2559 from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada and grant MOP57842 from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research to EB. We are grateful to all the past and present members of the Bialystok lab who collected the data and contributed the results to this analysis.

References

Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G. (2008a). Cognitive control and lexical access in younger and older bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 859–873.Google ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Luk, G. (2008b). Lexical access in bilinguals: Effects of vocabulary size and executive control. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 21, 522–538.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E., Luk, G., Peets, K. F., & Yang, S. (2010). Receptive vocabulary differences in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 525–531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bijeljac Babic, R., Biardeau, A., & Grainger, J. (1997). Masked orthographic priming in bilingual word recognition. Memory & Cognition, 25, 447–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burke, D. M., & Shafto, M. A. (2008). Language and aging. In Craik, F. I. M. & Salthouse, T. A. (eds.), The handbook of aging and cognition (3rd edn.), pp. 373–443. New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Costa, A. (2005). Lexical access in bilingual production. In Kroll, J. F. & B De Groot, A. M. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 308–325. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Delis, D. C., Kaplan, E., & Kramer, J. H. (2001). Verbal fluency subtest of the Delis–Kaplan Executive Function System. San Antonio, TX: The Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., & Acenas, L. A. (2004). What is a TOT? Cognate and translation effects on tip-of-the-tongue states in Spanish–English and Tagalog–English bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 30, 246–269.Google ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Fennema-Notestine, C., Montoya, R. I., & Jernigan, T. L. (2007). The bilingual effect on Boston Naming Test performance. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 13, 197–208.Google ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., Fennema-Notestine, C., Morris, S. K., (2005). Bilingualism affects picture naming but not picture classification. Memory & Cognition, 33, 1220–1234.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R. I., & Werner, G. (2002). Semantic and letter fluency in Spanish–English bilinguals. Neuropsychology, 16, 562–576.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Salmon, D. P., Montoya, R. I., & da Pena, E. (2010). Accessibility of the nondominant language in picture naming: A counterintuitive effect of dementia on bilingual language production. Neuropsychologia, 48, 1356–1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H. & Silverberg, N. B. (2001). Tip-of-the-tongue states in Hebrew–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 63–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hedden, T., Lautenschlager, G., & Park, D. (2005). Contributions of processing ability and knowledge to verbal memory tasks across the adult life-span. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A, 58, 169–190.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ivanova, I., & Costa, A. (2008). Does bilingualism hamper lexical access in speech production. Acta Psychologica, 127, 277–288.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luk, G., de Sa, E., & Bialystok, E. (2011). Is there a relation between onset age of bilingualism and enhancement of cognitive control? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14 (4), 596–596.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo, L., Luk, G., & Bialystok, E. (2010). Effect of language proficiency and executive control on verbal fluency performance in bilinguals. Cognition, 114, 29–41.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McClelland, J. L., & Elman, J. L. (1986). The TRACE model of speech perception. Cognitive Psychology, 18, 1–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Portocarrero, J. S., Burright, R. G., & Donovick, P. J. (2007). Vocabulary and verbal fluency of bilingual and monolingual college students. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 22, 415–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ransdell, S. E., & Fischler, I. (1987). Memory in a monolingual mode: When are bilinguals at a disadvantage? Journal of Memory and Language, 26, 392–405.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Roberts, P. M., Garcia, L. J., Desrochers, A., & Hernandez, D. (2002). English performance of proficient bilingual adults on the Boston Naming Test. Aphasiology, 16, 635–645.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosselli, M., Ardila, A., Araujo, K., Weekes, V.A., Caracciolo, V., Padilla, M., & Ostrosky-Solis, F. (2000). Verbal fluency and repetition skills in healthy older Spanish–English bilinguals. Applied Neuropsychology, 7, 17–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Salthouse, T. A. (1993). Speed and knowledge as determinants of adult age differences in verbal tasks. Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 48, 29–36.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523–568CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strauss, E., Sherman, E. M. S., & Spreen, O. (2006). A compendium of neuropsychological tests: Administration, norms and commentary. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar