So many variables, but what causes what? An invitation to Causal Inference Modelling

 De Cat, C., & Unsworth, S. (in press). So many variables, but what causes what? Journal of Child Language. (manuscript)

This is a reply to Johanne Paradis’ keynote article (Sources of individual differences in the dual language development of heritage bilinguals, JCL), which provides a comprehensive overview of factors influencing bilingual children’s dual language abilities. In this commentary, we provide an illustration of how the complex relationships between the variables discussed in Paradis’s keynote article could be conceptualised within a causal inference approach. We offer a modest starting point by summarising key features of causal inference modelling and by illustrating how it might help us better understand what causes what.

Using Latent Class Analysis to identify multilingual family profiles

Wood, Megam, Gunning, Lydia, & De Cat, Cécile. (2023). Achieving representativity in opportunity sampling: the ‘Bradford effect’ in the multilingual families Covid-19 survey. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2023.2284291

Typically, families from ethnic minority backgrounds and socioeconomic disadvantage are underrepresented in research. Using secondary data from a survey of the language practices of multilingual families during the first wave of the Covid-19 pandemic, we sought to ascertain whether the large proportion of Bradford-based respondents affected the representativeness of the sample and/or the patterns of responses. Respondents were objectively categorised into five latent profiles, based on the demographics of the household and families’ engagement with the Heritage Language (HL). The three of the household profiles considered “engaged” with their HL reported more positive attitudes to multilingualism. Their language practices also more markedly changed during the Lockdown compared to families who were less engaged with their HL. One of the five profiles was deemed to represent those usually considered “Hard-to-reach” in research (i.e., ethnic minority, low socio-economic status). The “Hard-to-reach” and “Unengaged” profiles were mainly represented by Bradford families. We argue that the exceptional engagement of Bradford communities in research resulted in better representativity of family profiles in this national survey.

How to quantify bilingual experience? Findings from a Delphi consensus survey

De Cat, C., Kašćelan, D., Prévost, P., Serratrice, L., Tuller, L., Unsworth, S., & consortium, Q.-B. (2023). How to quantify bilingual experience? Findings from a Delphi consensus survey. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 26(1), 112-124. doi:10.1017/S1366728922000359

While most investigations of bilingualism document participants’ language background, there is an absence of consensus on how to quantify bilingualism. The high number of different language background questionnaires used by researchers and practitioners jeopardises data comparability and cross-pollination between research and practice. Using the Delphi consensus survey method, we asked 132 panellists (researchers, speech and language therapists, teachers) from 29 countries to rate 124 statements on a 5-point agreement scale. Consensus was pre-defined as 75% agreement threshold. After two survey rounds, 79% of statements reached consensus. The need for common measures to quantify bilingualism was acknowledged by 96% of respondents. Agreement was reached to document: language exposure and use, language difficulties, proficiency (when it cannot be assessed directly), education and literacy, input quality, language mixing practices, and attitudes (towards languages and language mixing). We discuss the implications of these findings for the creation of a new tool to quantify bilingual experience.

This publication is one of the outputs from the Q-BEx project.

Commentary on a special volume on Children’s Acquisition of Referentiality in Narratives

De Cat, Cécile (2022). Opportunities and challenges in the analysis of the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (MAIN). First Language DOI:10.1177/01427237211064695. (manuscript)

Abstract: The development of the Multilingual Assessment Instrument for Narratives (MAIN) has no doubt contributed to prompting a renewed interest in children’s narratives. This carefully controlled test of narrative abilities elicits a rich set of measures spanning multiple linguistic domains and their interaction, including lexis, morphosyntax, discourse-pragmatics, as well as various aspects of narrative structure, communicative competence, and language use (such as code-switching). It is particularly well suited to the study of discourse cohesion, referential adequacy and informativeness, and of course to the study of narrative structure and richness, and the acquisition of a more formal or literary register. In this commentary article, I reflect on the five empirical papers included in the special issue. I focus on methodological challenges for the analysis of narratives and identify outstanding questions.

Open Science practices in applied linguistics: results from a preliminary survey

 With Men Liu, we have analysed and interpreted the results from the brief survey I carried out in spring 2021. These have been written up as a chapter for this forthcoming volume: Plonsky, L. (Ed.). Open Science in Applied Linguistics. John Benjamins. It can be downloaded from OSF preprints.  The data and code are also available via the /OSF.

A constellation of continua: Reconceptualising bilingualism, autism and language research

Kašćelan, Drasko and De Cat, Cécile (2022). A constellation of continua: Reconceptualising bilingualism, autism and language research.  Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism 12(1): 59-64. https://doi.org/10.1075/lab.21069.kas or pdf 

This is a commentary on the keynote article "Bilingual language development in autism" by Philippe Prévost and Laurie Tuller. 

A review of questionnaires quantifying bilingual experience in children: Do they document the same constructs?

First published output from the Q-BEx project: 

Kašćelan, Drasko, Prévost, Philippe, Serratrice, Ludovica., Tuller, Laurie, Unsworth, Sharon, and De Cat, Cécile (2022).  A review of questionnaires quantifying bilingual experience in children: Do they document the same constructs? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition 25(1): 29-41. Preprint available on the OSF. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728921000390 

Abstract: Questionnaires documenting children's bilingual experience have been used frequently in research on language and cognitive development. However, there has been little investigation of the comparability between these tools. In this review, we (i) provide a list of available questionnaires used to quantify bilingual experience in children; (ii) identify the components of bilingual experience documented across questionnaires; and (iii) discuss the comparability of the measures used to operationalise these components. In doing so, we review 48 questionnaires and identify 32 overarching constructs, manifested as 194 components, and we calculate the frequency with which they are documented. Finally, by focusing on a subset of overarching constructs (language exposure and use, activities, and current language skills), we observe high variability in how they are operationalised across tools. These findings highlight the need for greater transparency in how we document bilingualism and for more comparable measures.