ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
One test, many tongues: Surveying language proficiency across the globe.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Language influences our thinking and affects many aspects of cognition, from how we perceive the world to how we interact socially. Thus, objectively characterizing linguistic background is crucial for research in many areas, including second language acquisition, psycho-linguistics, and cognitive science. Traditional language proficiency tests, however, are manually composed by experts, limiting their scope for both lab and online settings. Here, we propose a pipeline that automatically derives a language proficiency test from a corpus of text and applies it to create new tests for 1,939 languages. Using this approach, we conducted a large-scale survey examining L1 and L2 proficiency across 34 countries, with participants tested on all 34 languages. Drawing from human ratings from 4,137 participants, our results validate that our test can effectively distinguish native speakers, second-language speakers, and nonspeakers within one minute, making it an effective tool for evaluating linguistic proficiency. We show that participants' linguistic and demographic backgrounds systematically influence both their language proficiency and their self-reported skills, and we map the prevalence of global languages, such as English and Spanish, among online participants. Moreover, we show that our vocabulary tests are strongly correlated with other linguistic competences-such as listening and writing-in a set of typologically varied languages, demonstrating our test is an efficient instrument to assess language proficiency. More broadly, our work offers a significant resource for investigating global variation in language skills and contributes to reducing the overreliance on the English language in the cognitive and social sciences.
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.