Examining the effects of active versus inactive bilingualism on executive control in a carefully matched non-immigrant sample

de Bruin, Angela; Bak, Thomas H.; Della Sala, Sergio · 2015 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1016/j.jml.2015.07.001

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the controversial "bilingual advantage" hypothesis, which posits that bilinguals possess superior executive control compared to monolinguals. The authors address two critical confounds in prior literature: the failure to match participants on background variables (such as socio-economic status and immigrant status) and the conflation of language knowledge with active language use. By examining a carefully matched sample of older adults in the Scottish Hebrides, the research aims to determine if bilingualism, and specifically the active use of two languages, confers cognitive benefits in inhibitory control and task-switching. The study involved 76 older adults (mean age 70.91) divided into three groups: active bilinguals (daily Gaelic-English users), inactive bilinguals (Gaelic-English knowledge but primarily English users), and English monolinguals. Crucially, all participants were non-immigrants born and raised in the region, ensuring homogeneity in lifestyle, education, socio-economic status, IQ, and age. Participants completed a Simon arrow task to measure inhibitory control and a task-switching paradigm to assess cognitive flexibility. The experimental design allowed for the dissociation of language acquisition (constant across bilingual groups) from language use (varying between active and inactive bilinguals). Statistical analysis employed both null hypothesis significance testing and Bayesian analysis to evaluate evidence for or against group differences. The results revealed no significant cognitive advantage for bilinguals. In the Simon arrow task, there were no differences in overall reaction times or Simon costs (the difference between congruent and incongruent trials) among the three groups. Bayesian analysis provided strong evidence supporting the null hypothesis, indicating that bilingualism did not affect interference suppression. In the task-switching paradigm, while active bilinguals showed lower raw switching costs compared to monolinguals, there were no significant differences in overall reaction times, proportional switching costs, or mixing costs. Inactive bilinguals did not differ from monolinguals on any switching metrics. Consequently, the data did not support the existence of a bilingual advantage in either inhibitory control or task switching when background variables are controlled. The findings challenge the reliability of the bilingual advantage hypothesis, suggesting that previously reported effects may stem from confounding variables like immigrant status or socio-economic disparities rather than bilingualism itself. Furthermore, the lack of difference between active and inactive bilinguals implies that the mere knowledge of a second language, without active daily use, does not drive executive control benefits. The study highlights the importance of rigorous matching in cognitive research and suggests that the literature may overestimate bilingual effects due to publication bias and uncontrolled demographic factors.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• executive function