Abstract
Recent studies have proposed that the executive advantages associated with bilingualism may stem from language-switching frequency rather than from bilingualism per se (see, for example, Prior and Gollan, 2011). Barbu et al. (2018) showed that high-frequency switchers (HFLSs) outperformed low-frequency switchers (LFLSs) on a mental flexibility task but not on alertness or response inhibition tasks. The aim of the present study was to replicate these results as well as to compare proficient (HFLSs and LFLSs) to a control group of monolingual participants. Two groups of proficient bilingual adults (30 HFLSs and 21 LFLSs) and a group of 28 monolinguals participated in the study. The results showed superior mental flexibility skills in HFLSs compared to (LFLSs) and monolinguals; furthermore, the two latter groups showed no difference in mental flexibility skills. These results provide novel support for the hypothesis that the so-called bilingual advantage is, in fact, a result of language-switching habits.
Highlights
Assessing the cognitive effects of bilingualism has been an important scientific issue since the early 1920s
HFLSs and LFLSs had a similar level of L2 proficiency, as reported by self-rated L2 skills in speaking, reading, writing, and speech comprehension and by an assessment of receptive L2 vocabulary skills using an adaptation of the British Picture Vocabulary Test (BPVT) (Dunn et al, 1982), a productive vocabulary measure (Cardebat et al, 1990), and a general vocabulary knowledge measure, Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English (LexTALE; Lemhöfer and Broersma, 2012; Brysbaert, 2013)
No significant group differences were observed on tasks assessing alertness or response inhibition
Summary
Assessing the cognitive effects of bilingualism has been an important scientific issue since the early 1920s At this time, the general consensus in the psycholinguistics field was that learning a second language (L2) had a negative effect on cognitive development, affecting skills such as verbal and non-verbal intelligence, arithmetic, and reading (Graham, 1925; Wang, 1926; Darcy, 1963). Negative results observed before 1962 have been attributed to a series of methodological flaws, as these studies did not control for different factors including L2 type, level of bilingualism, and socio-cultural status. These factors have been shown to influence results and are likely to represent underlying factors for the observed effects. When bilinguals’ language knowledge is assessed and participants’ intelligence skills are tested in the stronger language and not in the weaker L2, no significant differences between bilinguals and monolinguals are observed, and advantages in favor of bilinguals are even detected (for a review, see Darcy, 1963; Hakuta, 1986)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
