When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations
Self-ratings of language proficiency are ubiquitous in research on bilingualism, but little is known about their validity, especially when the same scale is used across different types of bilinguals. Self-ratings and picture naming data from 1044 Spanish–English and 519 Chinese–English bilinguals we...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) England), 2019-05, Vol.22 (3), p.516-536 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 536 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 3 |
| container_start_page | 516 |
| container_title | Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) |
| container_volume | 22 |
| creator | TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN FERREIRA, VICTOR S. GOLLAN, TAMAR H. |
| description | Self-ratings of language proficiency are ubiquitous in research on bilingualism, but little is known about their validity, especially when the same scale is used across different types of bilinguals. Self-ratings and picture naming data from 1044 Spanish–English and 519 Chinese–English bilinguals were analyzed in five between- and within-population comparisons. Chinese–English bilinguals scored more extremely than Spanish–English bilinguals, and in opposite directions at different endpoints of the self-ratings scale. Regrouping bilinguals by dominant language, instead of language membership, reduced discrepancies but significant group differences remained. Population differences appeared even in English, though this language is shared between populations. These results demonstrate significant problems with self-ratings, especially when comparing bilinguals of different language combinations; and subgroups of bilinguals who speak the same languages but vary in acquisition history and/or dominance. Objective proficiency measures (e.g., picture naming or proficiency interviews) are superior to self-ratings, to maximize classification accuracy and consistency across studies. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1017/S1366728918000421 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2216733987</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><cupid>10_1017_S1366728918000421</cupid><sourcerecordid>2216733987</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-a62784bfd83ce72cc0a82231189c6b13b8d97c1620c39ac4b688973489539ae73</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1UMtKAzEUDaJgrX6Au4Dr0dxkzMOdFF9QcFHF5ZDJJG3KdKYmM5b69WZoRUFcnXM5j3u5CJ0DuQQC4moGjHNBpQJJCMkpHKAR5FxlIHM4TDzJ2aAfo5MYl4RQIoQYoc-3hW2wxtF-JPQRN233Pd7gma1dFnTnm3nErcOlrxPtdY1rPeDc4nVonTfeNmaLK--cDbi03cYOrU2FN75b-OaXvV33dSpsm3iKjpyuoz3b4xi93t-9TB6z6fPD0-R2mpmcyC7TnAqZl66SzFhBjSFaUsoApDK8BFbKSgkDnBLDlDZ5yaVUguVSXafZCjZGF7vedOp7b2NXLNs-NGllQSlwwZiSgwt2LhPaGIN1xTr4lQ7bAkgxvLj48-KUYfuMXpXBV3P7U_1_6gvBg345</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2216733987</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations</title><source>Cambridge Journals</source><creator>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN ; FERREIRA, VICTOR S. ; GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</creator><creatorcontrib>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN ; FERREIRA, VICTOR S. ; GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</creatorcontrib><description>Self-ratings of language proficiency are ubiquitous in research on bilingualism, but little is known about their validity, especially when the same scale is used across different types of bilinguals. Self-ratings and picture naming data from 1044 Spanish–English and 519 Chinese–English bilinguals were analyzed in five between- and within-population comparisons. Chinese–English bilinguals scored more extremely than Spanish–English bilinguals, and in opposite directions at different endpoints of the self-ratings scale. Regrouping bilinguals by dominant language, instead of language membership, reduced discrepancies but significant group differences remained. Population differences appeared even in English, though this language is shared between populations. These results demonstrate significant problems with self-ratings, especially when comparing bilinguals of different language combinations; and subgroups of bilinguals who speak the same languages but vary in acquisition history and/or dominance. Objective proficiency measures (e.g., picture naming or proficiency interviews) are superior to self-ratings, to maximize classification accuracy and consistency across studies.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1366-7289</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1469-1841</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1017/S1366728918000421</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press</publisher><subject>Bilingualism ; Child Health ; Chinese languages ; Cultural differences ; English language ; Language dominance ; Language proficiency ; Language Skills ; Multilingualism ; Naming ; Principal components analysis ; Questionnaires ; Random variables ; Ratings & rankings ; Researchers ; Spanish language</subject><ispartof>Bilingualism (Cambridge, England), 2019-05, Vol.22 (3), p.516-536</ispartof><rights>Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-a62784bfd83ce72cc0a82231189c6b13b8d97c1620c39ac4b688973489539ae73</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-a62784bfd83ce72cc0a82231189c6b13b8d97c1620c39ac4b688973489539ae73</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.cambridge.org/core/product/identifier/S1366728918000421/type/journal_article$$EHTML$$P50$$Gcambridge$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>164,314,780,784,27923,27924,55627</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FERREIRA, VICTOR S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</creatorcontrib><title>When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations</title><title>Bilingualism (Cambridge, England)</title><addtitle>Bilingualism</addtitle><description>Self-ratings of language proficiency are ubiquitous in research on bilingualism, but little is known about their validity, especially when the same scale is used across different types of bilinguals. Self-ratings and picture naming data from 1044 Spanish–English and 519 Chinese–English bilinguals were analyzed in five between- and within-population comparisons. Chinese–English bilinguals scored more extremely than Spanish–English bilinguals, and in opposite directions at different endpoints of the self-ratings scale. Regrouping bilinguals by dominant language, instead of language membership, reduced discrepancies but significant group differences remained. Population differences appeared even in English, though this language is shared between populations. These results demonstrate significant problems with self-ratings, especially when comparing bilinguals of different language combinations; and subgroups of bilinguals who speak the same languages but vary in acquisition history and/or dominance. Objective proficiency measures (e.g., picture naming or proficiency interviews) are superior to self-ratings, to maximize classification accuracy and consistency across studies.</description><subject>Bilingualism</subject><subject>Child Health</subject><subject>Chinese languages</subject><subject>Cultural differences</subject><subject>English language</subject><subject>Language dominance</subject><subject>Language proficiency</subject><subject>Language Skills</subject><subject>Multilingualism</subject><subject>Naming</subject><subject>Principal components analysis</subject><subject>Questionnaires</subject><subject>Random variables</subject><subject>Ratings & rankings</subject><subject>Researchers</subject><subject>Spanish language</subject><issn>1366-7289</issn><issn>1469-1841</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AIMQZ</sourceid><sourceid>AVQMV</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><sourceid>K50</sourceid><sourceid>M1D</sourceid><recordid>eNp1UMtKAzEUDaJgrX6Au4Dr0dxkzMOdFF9QcFHF5ZDJJG3KdKYmM5b69WZoRUFcnXM5j3u5CJ0DuQQC4moGjHNBpQJJCMkpHKAR5FxlIHM4TDzJ2aAfo5MYl4RQIoQYoc-3hW2wxtF-JPQRN233Pd7gma1dFnTnm3nErcOlrxPtdY1rPeDc4nVonTfeNmaLK--cDbi03cYOrU2FN75b-OaXvV33dSpsm3iKjpyuoz3b4xi93t-9TB6z6fPD0-R2mpmcyC7TnAqZl66SzFhBjSFaUsoApDK8BFbKSgkDnBLDlDZ5yaVUguVSXafZCjZGF7vedOp7b2NXLNs-NGllQSlwwZiSgwt2LhPaGIN1xTr4lQ7bAkgxvLj48-KUYfuMXpXBV3P7U_1_6gvBg345</recordid><startdate>201905</startdate><enddate>201905</enddate><creator>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN</creator><creator>FERREIRA, VICTOR S.</creator><creator>GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</creator><general>Cambridge University Press</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7T9</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88G</scope><scope>88J</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AIMQZ</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AVQMV</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>CPGLG</scope><scope>CRLPW</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>K50</scope><scope>LIQON</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M1D</scope><scope>M2M</scope><scope>M2R</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>PSYQQ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201905</creationdate><title>When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations</title><author>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN ; FERREIRA, VICTOR S. ; GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c408t-a62784bfd83ce72cc0a82231189c6b13b8d97c1620c39ac4b688973489539ae73</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Bilingualism</topic><topic>Child Health</topic><topic>Chinese languages</topic><topic>Cultural differences</topic><topic>English language</topic><topic>Language dominance</topic><topic>Language proficiency</topic><topic>Language Skills</topic><topic>Multilingualism</topic><topic>Naming</topic><topic>Principal components analysis</topic><topic>Questionnaires</topic><topic>Random variables</topic><topic>Ratings & rankings</topic><topic>Researchers</topic><topic>Spanish language</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>FERREIRA, VICTOR S.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Psychology Database (Alumni)</collection><collection>Social Science Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection</collection><collection>Arts Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Collection</collection><collection>Linguistics Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Art, Design & Architecture Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Literature - U.S. Customers Only</collection><collection>Education Database</collection><collection>Arts & Humanities Database</collection><collection>Psychology Database</collection><collection>Social Science Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest One Psychology</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Bilingualism (Cambridge, England)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>TOMOSCHUK, BRENDAN</au><au>FERREIRA, VICTOR S.</au><au>GOLLAN, TAMAR H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations</atitle><jtitle>Bilingualism (Cambridge, England)</jtitle><addtitle>Bilingualism</addtitle><date>2019-05</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>22</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>516</spage><epage>536</epage><pages>516-536</pages><issn>1366-7289</issn><eissn>1469-1841</eissn><abstract>Self-ratings of language proficiency are ubiquitous in research on bilingualism, but little is known about their validity, especially when the same scale is used across different types of bilinguals. Self-ratings and picture naming data from 1044 Spanish–English and 519 Chinese–English bilinguals were analyzed in five between- and within-population comparisons. Chinese–English bilinguals scored more extremely than Spanish–English bilinguals, and in opposite directions at different endpoints of the self-ratings scale. Regrouping bilinguals by dominant language, instead of language membership, reduced discrepancies but significant group differences remained. Population differences appeared even in English, though this language is shared between populations. These results demonstrate significant problems with self-ratings, especially when comparing bilinguals of different language combinations; and subgroups of bilinguals who speak the same languages but vary in acquisition history and/or dominance. Objective proficiency measures (e.g., picture naming or proficiency interviews) are superior to self-ratings, to maximize classification accuracy and consistency across studies.</abstract><cop>Cambridge, UK</cop><pub>Cambridge University Press</pub><doi>10.1017/S1366728918000421</doi><tpages>21</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1366-7289 |
| ispartof | Bilingualism (Cambridge, England), 2019-05, Vol.22 (3), p.516-536 |
| issn | 1366-7289 1469-1841 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_proquest_journals_2216733987 |
| source | Cambridge Journals |
| subjects | Bilingualism Child Health Chinese languages Cultural differences English language Language dominance Language proficiency Language Skills Multilingualism Naming Principal components analysis Questionnaires Random variables Ratings & rankings Researchers Spanish language |
| title | When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-11T22%3A41%3A45IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=When%20a%20seven%20is%20not%20a%20seven:%20Self-ratings%20of%20bilingual%20language%20proficiency%20differ%20between%20and%20within%20language%20populations&rft.jtitle=Bilingualism%20(Cambridge,%20England)&rft.au=TOMOSCHUK,%20BRENDAN&rft.date=2019-05&rft.volume=22&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=516&rft.epage=536&rft.pages=516-536&rft.issn=1366-7289&rft.eissn=1469-1841&rft_id=info:doi/10.1017/S1366728918000421&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2216733987%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2216733987&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_cupid=10_1017_S1366728918000421&rfr_iscdi=true |