ArticlePloS one2021
Absence of a bilingual cognitive flexibility advantage: A replication study in preschoolers.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Some studies have found a bilingual advantage in children's executive function and some failed to find a bilingual advantage. For example, the results of a previous study by Bialystok & Martin (2004) indicated that Chinese-English bilingual preschool children outperformed English monolingual children in solving the dimensional change card sort (DCCS). The goal of our study was to replicate this study using the same dimensional change card sort task. We also tested our participants on vocabulary and digit span. Our participants were 40 English monolingual and 40 Mandarin-English bilingual children and were within the same age range as the children in Bialystok & Martin's (2004) study. Our results showed no difference between bilinguals and monolinguals. Both groups of children in the present study performed better than those in Bialystok and Martin (2004), but the bigger difference was between the two groups of monolinguals. These results suggest that it could be important to attend to monolingual children's performance, in addition to bilinguals', when testing for a bilingual advantage. Our replication study is important because it helps with clarifying the validity of studies finding a bilingual advantage and to help future researchers know whether to build on their findings or not.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.