Prior work has yielded mixed findings regarding the relationship between language control and domain-general inhibitory control. Here, we tested the possibility that omnibus language ability would moderate the relationship between language control and inhibitory control in bilingual children. We tested 43 Spanish-English bilingual children (ages 4–5.92 years; 25 females). Children engaged in play-based interactions with their parent, and rates of cross-speaker switches (using a language different from one used by parent) indexed language control. Inhibitory control was measured via a non-verbal flanker task. Analyses revealed that higher frequency of cross-speaker code-switches was associated with better inhibitory control only for children with higher levels of language ability. For children with lower language skills, there was no association between switches and inhibitory control. These findings align with the literature linking cognitive control and language control in bilinguals and extend it to indicate that the strength of the language system constrains this link.

The present study examined whether length of bilingual experience and language ability contributed to cross-situational word learning (XSWL) in Spanish-English bilingual school-aged children. We contrasted performance in a high variability condition, where children were exposed to multiple speakers and exemplars simultaneously, to performance in a condition where children were exposed to no variability in either speakers or exemplars. Results revealed graded effects of bilingualism and language ability on XSWL under conditions of increased variability. Specifically, bilingualism bolstered learning when variability was present in the input but not when variability was absent in the input. Similarly, robust language abilities supported learning in the high variability condition. In contrast, children with weaker language skills learned more word-object associations in the no variability condition than in the high variability condition. Together, the results suggest that variation in the learner and variation in the input interact and modulate mechanisms of lexical learning in children.

In adulthood, novel words are commonly encountered in the context of sequential language learning, and to a lesser extent, when learning a new word in one's native language. Paired-associate (PAL) and cross-situational word learning (CSWL) paradigms have been studied separately, under distinct theoretical umbrellas, limiting the understanding of the mechanisms underlying the learning process in each. We tested 126 monolinguals and 111 bilinguals on PAL and CSWL, manipulating familiarity and measuring verbal working memory. Results revealed highly similar learning performance across groups, both demonstrating better performance in PAL than in CSWL, similar sensitivity to familiarity, and similar reliance on phonological working memory. We observed a trend such that bilinguals outperformed monolinguals in PAL but not in CSWL, but this trend was weak. Findings indicate limited effects of bilingualism on word learning in adulthood and suggest highly similar word learning mechanisms in learners with different linguistic experiences.

The current study examined the impact of a speaker's gaze on novel-word learning in 4-5-year old monolingual (N = 23) and bilingual children (N = 24). Children were taught novel words when the speaker looked at the object both times while labeling it (consistent) and when the speaker looked at the object only the first time (inconsistent). During teaching, bilingual children differentiated between the target object (that matched the label) and non-target object (that did not match the label) earlier than the monolingual children on trials without eye-gaze information. However, during testing, monolingual children showed more robust retention of novel words than bilingual children in both conditions. Findings suggest that bilingualism shapes children's attention to eye-gaze during word learning, but that, ultimately, there is no bilingual advantage for utilizing this cue in the service of word retention.

Acoustic cues to deception on a picture-naming task were analyzed in three groups of English speakers: monolinguals, bilinguals with English as their first language, and bilinguals with English as a second language. Results revealed that all participants had longer reaction times when generating falsehoods than when producing truths, and that the effect was more robust for English as a second language bilinguals than for the other two groups. Articulation rate was higher for all groups when producing lies. Mean fundamental frequency and intensity cues were not reliable cues to deception, but there was lower variance in both of these parameters when generating false versus true labels for all participants. Results suggest that naming latency was the only cue to deception that differed by language background. These findings broadly support the cognitive-load theory of deception, suggesting that a combination of producing deceptive speech and using a second language puts an extra load on the speaker.

The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q) is a validated questionnaire tool for collecting self-reported proficiency and experience data from bilingual and multilingual speakers ages 14 to 80. It is available in over 20 languages, and can be administered in a digital, paper-and-pencil, and oral interview format. The LEAP-Q is used by researchers across various disciplines (Psychology, Neuroscience, Linguistics, Education, Communication Sciences & Disorders, etc.) to provide a comprehensive description of their bilingual participants, to substantiate a division of bilinguals into groups (e.g., early vs. late bilinguals), and to screen participants for adequate or threshold levels of language proficiency. Best practices for using the LEAP-Q include administration of the full questionnaire, consideration of acquisition and history of language use together with self-ratings of proficiency, and supplementation of self-reported data with objective language measures whenever possible. The LEAP-Q can be downloaded at no cost at https://bilingualism.northwestern.edu/leapq/.

In the present study, we examined the effect of speaker certainty on word-learning performance in English-speaking monolingual (MAge = 6.40) and Spanish–English bilingual (MAge = 6.58) children. No group differences were observed when children learned novel words from a certain speaker. However, bilingual children were more willing to learn novel words from an uncertain speaker than their monolingual peers. These findings indicate that language experience influences how children weigh cues to speaker credibility during learning and suggest that children with more diverse linguistic backgrounds (i.e., bilinguals) are less prone to prioritizing information based on speaker certainty.

The central hypothesis in the Pierce, Genesee, Delcenserie, and Morgan article is that phonological memory is key to explaining the relationship between early language experience (more specifically, less and more optimal ends of the language-experience continuum) and language learning outcomes. One piece of evidence offered is that phonological memory skills are enhanced by bilingualism, with bilingualism representing enriched experience. Here, I propose that data from bilingual children may contradict Pierce et al.’s central hypothesis, rather than support it.

Language control, bilinguals’ ability to regulate which language is used, has been posited to recruit domain-general cognitive control. However, studies relating language control and cognitive control have yielded mixed results in adults and have not been undertaken in children. The current study examined the contributions of nonlinguistic task-shifting to language control in Spanish–English bilingual children (ages 5–7) during a cued-switch picture-naming task. Language control was assessed at two levels: (1) cross-language errors, which indexed the success of language selection, and (2) naming speed, which indexed the efficiency of lexical selection. Nonlinguistic task-shifting was a robust predictor of children's cross-language errors, reflecting a role for domain-general cognitive control during language selection. However, task-shifting predicted naming speed only in children's non-dominant language, suggesting a more nuanced role for cognitive control in the efficiency of selecting a particular lexical target.

Valian (2014) suggests that the messy state of the literature examining the effects of bilingualism on executive functioning (EF) stems from lack of clarity in how EFs are defined and measured, and from lack of control over other factors that can modulate EF. We argue that the lack of clarity in how bilingualism is defined and measured is no less problematic. We focus our commentary on two related issues.

The goal of the current study was to examine bilinguals' phonological short-term and working memory performance in their native/first (L1) and second (L2) languages. Korean–English bilinguals were tested in both Korean (L1) and English (L2). Short-term memory (STM) was measured via a nonword repetition task, where participants repeated nonwords that increased in length. Working memory (WM) was measured via a complex task, where the nonword repetition task was combined with an animacy judgment task. In general, bilinguals performed better on the STM task than on the WM task, and with shorter nonwords than with longer nonwords. Results also revealed that L1 STM performance was superior to L2 STM performance, but only for the longest nonwords, whereas L1 WM performance was superior to L2 WM performance across all length levels. In addition, correlation analyses between bilinguals' L1 and L2 performance revealed stronger cross-linguistic associations for the WM task than for the STM task. Together, the findings suggest that WM tasks may engage domain-general central executive processes in bilinguals, whereas STM skills may depend on language-specific knowledge in the L1 and the L2.

Previous studies have indicated that bilingualism may facilitate lexical learning in adults. The goals of this research were (i) to examine whether bilingual influences on word learning diverge for phonologically-familiar and phonologically-unfamiliar novel words, and (ii) to examine whether increased phonological memory capacity can account for bilingual effects on word learning. In Experiment 1, participants learned phonologically-familiar novel words that were constructed using the phonemes of English – the native language for all participants. In Experiment 2, participants learned phonologically-unfamiliar novel words that included non-English phonemes. In each experiment, bilingual adults were contrasted with two groups of monolingual adults: a high memory-span monolingual group (that matched bilinguals on phonological memory performance) and a low-span monolingual group. Results showed that bilingual participants in both experiments outperformed monolingual participants, both high-span and low-span. High-span monolinguals outperformed low-span monolinguals when learning phonologically-unfamiliar novel words, but not when learning phonologically-familiar novel words. The findings suggest that the bilingual advantage for novel word learning is not contingent on the phonological properties of novel words, and that phonological memory capacity as measured here cannot account for the bilingual effects on learning.

In her Keynote Article, Paradis reviews evidence from bilingual language development to assess the claims of two opposing theoretical views of language disorders. Specifically, she examines the evidence for similarities in language profiles of typically developing (TD) sequential bilingual (second language [L2]) children and monolingual children with specific language impairment (SLI) with respect to Rice's extended optional infinitive (EOI) account. A limited processing capacity (LPC) account of SLI, Leonard's surface hypothesis, is evaluated within the context of comparisons among bilingual children with SLI, monolingual children with SLI, and TD bilingual children. Paradis concludes that the evidence from bilingual children poses challenges for both accounts of SLI.

Cross-linguistic borrowing (overt use of words from the other language) and transfer (use of semantic or syntactic structures from the other language without active switching to that language) were examined during language production in Russian–English bilinguals. Grammatical category (noun/verb) and level of concreteness were found to influence language interaction. More cross-linguistic borrowings were found for nouns than for verbs and more cross-linguistic transfers were found for verbs than for nouns, suggesting that grammatical categories are differentially vulnerable to covert and overt language interaction. Moreover, concrete nouns and verbs were transferred more than abstract nouns and verbs, suggesting that level of concreteness influences lexical access in bilinguals. Overall, bilinguals transferred more when speaking their second and less proficient language and borrowed more when speaking their first and less recent language (especially if the described event took place in the other language). We suggest that language architecture (e.g., semantic representation, lexical access) and language environment influence the nature of cross-linguistic interaction.