This study examined whether the Foreign-Language effect, an increase in bilinguals’ rate of rational decisions to moral dilemmas in their foreign versus their native language, is influenced by emotion and the modality in which the dilemmas are presented. 154 Dutch–English bilinguals were asked to read and listen to personal and impersonal moral dilemmas in Dutch or in English. Importantly, the reading task had the character of a self-paced reading task to resemble the listening task as closely as possible. In both modalities, participants’ task was to indicate whether the proposed action was appropriate or not. Results showed that the Foreign-Language effect was present for personal dilemmas only. In addition, an effect of modality demonstrated that participants took overall more rational decisions during the listening than the reading task. These findings give insight in the interplay between language, emotion and task demands, revealing that moral decision making is context-dependent.

Previous research has shown that heritage speakers struggle with inflectional morphology. ‘Limitations of online resources’ for processing a non-dominant language has been claimed as one possible reason for these difficulties. To date, however, there is very little experimental evidence on real-time language processing in heritage speakers. Here we report results from a masked priming experiment with 97 bilingual (Turkish/German) heritage speakers and a control group of 40 non-heritage speakers of Turkish examining regular and irregular forms of the Turkish aorist. We found that, for the regular aorist, heritage speakers use the same morphological decomposition mechanism (‘affix stripping’) as control speakers, whereas for processing irregularly inflected forms they exhibited more variability (i.e., less homogeneous performance) than the control group. Heritage speakers also demonstrated semantic priming effects. At a more general level, these results indicate that heritage speakers draw on multiple sources of information for recognizing morphologically complex words.

The past decade has witnessed some dramatic methodological changes in the wider disciplines of psycholinguistics, psychology, and experimental linguistics. One such set of changes comprises the development of open and transparent research practices, which have increasingly been adopted in response to concerns that empirical results often fail to replicate and may not generalise across samples and experimental conditions (Gibson & Fedorenko, 2013; Maxwell, Lau, & Howard, 2015; McElreath & Smaldino, 2015; Yarkoni, 2020). Another important set of changes concerns the use of sophisticated statistical techniques, such as mixed-effects models (Baayen, Davidson, & Bates, 2008) and Bayesian analyses (Vasishth, Nicenboim, Beckman, Li & Kong, 2018), which can provide much more information about magnitudes of effects and sources of variation than the more traditional statistical approaches.

Substantial research has examined cognition in aging bilinguals. However, less work has investigated the effects of aging on language itself in bilingualism. In this article I comprehensively review prior research on this topic, and interpret the evidence in light of current theories of aging and theories of bilingualism. First, aging indeed appears to affect bilinguals’ language performance, though there is considerable variability in the trajectory across adulthood (declines, age-invariance, and improvements) and in the extent to which these trajectories resemble those found in monolinguals. I argue that these age effects are likely explained by the key opposing forces of increasing experience and cognitive declines in aging. Second, consistent with some theoretical work on bilingual language processing, the grammatical processing mechanisms do not seem to change between younger and older bilingual adults, even after decades of immersion. I conclude by discussing how future research can further advance the field.

It has recently been suggested that bilingualism, rather than age of acquisition, is what underlies less than nativelike attainment in childhood L2 acquisition. Currently, however, the empirical evidence in favor of or against this interpretation remains scarce. The present study sets out to fill this gap, implementing a novel factorial design in which the variables age of acquisition and bilingualism have been fully crossed. Eighty speakers of Swedish, who were either L1 monolinguals, L1 simultaneous bilinguals, L2 sequential monolinguals (international adoptees), or L2 sequential bilinguals (childhood immigrants), were tested on phonetic, grammatical, and lexical measures. The results indicate consistent effects of age of acquisition, but only limited effects of bilingualism, on ultimate attainment. These findings thus show that age of acquisition – not bilingualism – is the primary determinant of L2 ultimate attainment.

Languages differ in the preferences for the interpretation of the scope relation between negation and a quantifier. This study investigates the understudied issue of how interpretive preferences associated with a quantifier scope in learners’ L1 and L2 affect their scope interpretations in L3 acquisition. Based on the current models of L3 acquisition, we tested which language, L1 or L2, exerts a stronger effect on the L3 acquisition of quantifier scope. To this end, the study involved two groups of multilingual children (11–13 years old) with different L1s (Chinese or Russian) but with the same L2 (Korean) and L3 (English). The participants completed truth-value judgment tasks designed to investigate their interpretation patterns for English sentences with negation and a quantifier (e.g., Tom did not cut all the trees). The results showed that both groups preferred the L3 interpretation similar to that preferred in their L2, but not in their L1, suggesting a potential L2 influence on L3 acquisition. The study evaluates L3 acquisition theories in light of these results.

The extent to which findings in bilingualism research are contingent on specific analytic choices, experimental designs, or operationalisations, is currently unknown. Poor availability of data, analysis code, and materials has hindered the development of cumulative lines of research. In this review, we survey current practices and advocate a credibility revolution in bilingualism research through the adoption of minimum standards of transparency. Full disclosure of data and code is necessary not only to assess the reproducibility of original findings, but also to test the robustness of these findings to different analytic specifications. Similarly, full provision of experimental materials and protocols underpins assessment of both the replicability of original findings, as well as their generalisability to different contexts and samples. We illustrate the review with examples where good practice has advanced the agenda in bilingualism research and highlight resources to help researchers get started.

In the present study we challenge the generally accepted view based primarily on L1 data that surface linguistic information decays rapidly during reading and that only propositional information is retained in memory. In two eye-tracking experiments, we show that both L1 and L2 adult readers retain verbatim information of a text. In particular, the reading behaviour of L2 German learners revealed that they were sensitive to both lexical (synonyms) and syntactic (active/passive alternation) substitutions during a second reading of the texts, while L1 exhibited only reduced sensitivity to the lexical substitutions. The results deliver an important piece of evidence that complies with several current processing (e.g., Shallow Structure Hypothesis), acquisition (Declarative/Procedural Model) and cognitive (e.g., Fuzzy Trace Theory) approaches and adds a new dimension to their empirical and theoretical basis.

Past studies have reported memory differences between monolingual and bilingual infants (Brito & Barr, 2012; Singh, Fu, Rahman, Hameed, Sanmugam, Agarwal, Jiang, Chong, Meaney & Rifkin-Graboi, 2015). A common critique within the bilingualism literature is the absence of socioeconomic indicators and/or a lack of socioeconomic diversity among participants. Previous research has demonstrated robust bilingual differences in memory generalization from 6- to 24-months of age. The goal of the current study was to examine if these findings would replicate in a sample of 18-month-old monolingual and bilingual infants from a range of socioeconomic backgrounds (N = 92). Results indicate no differences between language groups on working memory or cued recall, but significant differences for memory generalization, with bilingual infants outperforming monolingual infants regardless of socioeconomic status (SES). These findings replicate and extend results from past studies (Brito & Barr, 2012; Brito, Sebastián-Gallés & Barr, 2015) and suggest possible differential learning patterns dependent on linguistic experience.

In this study we investigated 107 young learners’ L2 English receptive vocabulary knowledge and speaking skills at two points in time, before and after the onset of instruction. We also investigated the role of several individual difference variables: out-of-school exposure to English, length of instruction, analytic reasoning ability, working memory, L1 vocabulary knowledge and prior L2 knowledge. Results show that L2 English proficiency in receptive vocabulary knowledge and speaking skills greatly improved over time and that the effects of schooling and contextual learning are largely additive. The main predictor of the children's proficiency at time 2 was their L2 prior knowledge, which they had acquired through contextual language learning before getting formal education. When considering the other variables that predicted L2 proficiency, the contribution of internal variables (L1 vocabulary size and working memory) was considerably smaller than that of external variables (out-of-school exposure and length of instruction).

Does a concurrent verbal working memory (WM) load constrain cross-linguistic activation? In a visual world study, participants listened to Hindi (L1) or English (L2) spoken words and viewed a display containing the phonological cohort of the translation equivalent (TE cohort) of the spoken word and 3 distractors. Experiment 1 was administered without a load. Participants then maintained two or four letters (Experiment 2) or two, six or eight letters (Experiment 3) in WM and were tested on backward sequence recognition after the visual world display. Greater looks towards TE cohorts were observed in both the language directions in Experiment 1. With a load, TE cohort activation was inhibited in the L2 – L1 direction and observed only in the early stages after word onset in the L1 – L2 direction suggesting a critical role of language direction. These results indicate that cross-linguistic activation as seen through eye movements depends on cognitive resources such as WM.

Syntactic parsing plays a central role in the interpretation of sentences, but it is unclear to what extent non-native speakers can deploy native-like grammatical knowledge during online comprehension. The current eye-tracking study investigated how Chinese–English bilinguals and native English speakers respond to syntactic category and subcategorization information while reading sentences with object-subject ambiguities. We also obtained measures of English language experience, working memory capacity, and executive function to determine how these cognitive variables influence online parsing. During reading, monolinguals and bilinguals showed similar garden-path effects related to syntactic reanalysis, but native English speakers responded more robustly to verb subcategorization cues. Readers with greater language experience and executive function showed increased sensitivity to verb subcategorization cues, but parsing was not influenced by working memory capacity. These results are consistent with exposure-based accounts of bilingual sentence processing, and they support a link between syntactic processing and domain-general cognitive control.

We examined how proficiency influences the processing of emotion words in Spanish–English bilinguals (22 balanced and 20 unbalanced). All unbalanced bilinguals were more proficient in English than Spanish. Participants rated the valence of negative, neutral, and positive words in both languages while EEG was being recorded. ERP latencies and amplitudes were analyzed for two components. The language effect was significant on the late positive component (LPC) amplitude, which was larger for emotion than for neutral words for both groups in English. The unbalanced group presented larger LPC amplitudes for positive than for neutral and for neutral than for negative words in Spanish, suggesting emotion processing differences in these participants’ less proficient language. Valence effects were consistent across languages for the balanced group, but not for the unbalanced group, perhaps reflecting differences in reactivity to emotion words in the less proficient language.

Preregistration is an open science practice that requires the specification of research hypotheses and analysis plans before the data are inspected. Here, we discuss the benefits of preregistration for hypothesis-driven, confirmatory bilingualism research. Using examples from psycholinguistics and bilingualism, we illustrate how non-peer reviewed preregistrations can serve to implement a clean distinction between hypothesis testing and data exploration. This distinction helps researchers avoid casting post-hoc hypotheses and analyses as confirmatory ones. We argue that, in keeping with current best practices in the experimental sciences, preregistration, along with sharing data and code, should be an integral part of hypothesis-driven bilingualism research.

Spanish–English bilinguals rarely code-switch in the perfect structure between the Spanish auxiliary haber (“to have”) and the participle (e.g., “Ella ha voted”; “She has voted”). However, they are somewhat likely to switch in the progressive structure between the Spanish auxiliary estar (“to be”) and the participle (“Ella está voting”; “She is voting”). This phenomenon is known as the “auxiliary phrase asymmetry”. One hypothesis as to why this occurs is that estar has more semantic weight as it also functions as an independent verb, whereas haber is almost exclusively used as an auxiliary verb. To test this hypothesis, we employed a connectionist model that produces spontaneous code-switches. Through simulation experiments, we showed that i) the asymmetry emerges in the model and that ii) the asymmetry disappears when using haber also as a main verb, which adds semantic weight. Therefore, the lack of semantic weight of haber may indeed cause the asymmetry.

While heritage language phonology has attracted a great deal of attention, little is known about the development of heritage phonological grammars. This study examines the production of the Spanish trill /r/ by school-aged (9-10 years) and adult heritage speakers. Results showed that the adult heritage speakers produced the trill in a more target-like manner than the child heritage speakers, although half of them diverged from non-heritage native baselines reported in other studies. Further analysis of the distribution of trill variants suggests that heritage Spanish trill development occurs in the order of single lingual constriction → frication → multiple lingual constrictions. However, instead of abandoning variants of early stages, some adult heritage speakers kept them in their trill inventories, demonstrating increased variability. Our findings indicate that 9- to 10-year-old heritage speakers are still in the process of developing heritage phonological grammars and even during adulthood their grammars may not reach stability.

Low power in empirical studies can be compared to blurred vision. It makes the signal ambiguous, so that conclusions depend more on interpretation than on observation. Data patterns that look sensible are published as evidence for theoretical positions and unclear patterns are discarded as noise, whereas both could be due to sampling error or could be a perfect reflection of the population parameters. Simulations indicate that little research with sample sizes lower than 100 participants per group provides a picture of enough resolution to draw firm conclusions. This is particularly true for research comparing groups of people and involving interaction effects. As a result, it is to be feared that many findings in bilingualism research do not have a firm base, certainly not if they go beyond a simple comparison of two within-participants conditions.

The current study analyzes Spanish present tense morphology with a focus on overregularization. It examines written production from two groups of English/Spanish bilingual children in a dual immersion setting, Spanish heritage language (SHL) speakers (n = 21) and Spanish second language (SL2) learners (n = 41), comparing them to age-matched (nine to ten years old) Spanish majority language children (n = 15). Spanish majority children show full mastery of present tense regular, stem-changing and irregular morphology. SHL children seem to have acquired mastery of regular inflectional morphology, but not of stem-changing morphology. SL2 children are significantly less accurate than both majority Spanish and SHL children in terms of both regular and irregular morphology. Evidence of overregularization, but not of irregularization, is provided for both SHL and SL2 children. The analysis of overregularization errors supports a variational approach (Yang, 2016) to acquisition, storage and access of morphology.

We report two offline and two eye-movement experiments examining non-native (L2) sentence processing during and after reanalysis of temporarily ambiguous sentences like “While Mary dressed the baby laughed happily”. Such sentences cause reanalysis at the main clause verb (“laughed”), as the temporarily ambiguous noun phrase (“the baby”) may initially be misanalysed as the direct object of the subordinate clause verb (“dressed”). The offline experiments revealed that L2ers have difficulty reanalysing temporarily ambiguous sentences with a greater persistence of the initially assigned misinterpretation than native (L1) speakers. In the eye-movement experiments, we found that L2ers complete reanalysis similarly to L1ers but fail to fully erase the memory trace of the initially assigned interpretation. Our results suggested that the source of L2 reanalysis difficulty is a failure to erase the initially assigned misinterpretation from memory rather than a failure to conduct syntactic reanalysis.