Controlling for SES, monolingual children outperform both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals on single-language English receptive and expressive vocabulary measures¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associationalr2·q3·i3large
Currency · newest study 2014 · checked against its sources 2026-10-20 (automated, 2 of 2 entries) · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q3 i3 On English receptive vocabulary (PPVT-III), monolinguals outperformed simultaneous and sequential bilinguals, and simultaneous bilinguals outperformed sequential bilinguals, controlling for SES. → Gross Megan 2014
q3 i3 On English expressive vocabulary (Woodcock-Johnson III Picture Vocabulary), all pairwise group differences were significant in the same direction, controlling for SES. → Gross Megan 2014 (2)
Evidence¶
Gross Megan 2014¶
Gross Megan, Buac Milijana, Kaushanskaya Margarita. (2014). Conceptual scoring of receptive and expressive vocabulary measures in simultaneous and sequential bilingual children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0026
q3 · i3 · associational · r2
ANCOVA of English receptive vocabulary (PPVT-III) language-specific scores across 40 monolinguals, 39 simultaneous and 19 sequential bilinguals, with SES as covariate; a significant group effect (ηp2 = .30) with all pairwise contrasts significant as quoted.
"The ANCOVA revealed a main effect of group, F (2, 94) = 19.9, p < .001, ηp2 = .30. Follow-up comparisons revealed that the monolinguals outperformed the simultaneous bilinguals, p = .002, and the sequential bilinguals, p < .001, and the simultaneous bilinguals outperformed the sequential bilinguals, p = .001."
Gross Megan 2014 (2)¶
Gross Megan, Buac Milijana, Kaushanskaya Margarita. (2014). Conceptual scoring of receptive and expressive vocabulary measures in simultaneous and sequential bilingual children. American Journal of Speech-Language Pathology. https://doi.org/10.1044/2014_AJSLP-13-0026
q3 · i3 · associational · r2
ANCOVA of English expressive vocabulary (Woodcock-Johnson III Picture Vocabulary) language-specific scores with SES as covariate in the same 98-child sample; significant group effect (ηp2 = .25) and all pairwise comparisons significant as quoted.
"There was a significant main effect of group, F (2, 94) = 15.8, p < .001, ηp2 = .25. All follow-up comparisons between groups were significant. Monolinguals outperformed simultaneous bilinguals, p = .002, and sequential bilinguals, p < .001, and simultaneous bilinguals outperformed sequential bilinguals, p = .012."
Discussion¶
Learner Variables¶
- Oral Language — outcome: instruction changes it
- Reading and Language — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes
Related Claims¶
- Conceptual scoring removes the monolingual-simultaneous-bilingual gap in English receptive vocabulary but not in English expressive vocabulary — related
- Conceptual scoring significantly raises bilingual children's standardized vocabulary scores, an effect not modulated by test language, modality, or acquisition history once SES is controlled — related
- DLL children can catch up to monolingual norms in English vocabulary, but need substantial time and exposure to do so — related
- Sequential bilinguals score significantly below monolinguals on English vocabulary even with conceptual scoring and SES controlled — related
- Bilingual children show faster trail-making B performance, while Indian bilinguals are faster on Trails A and monolinguals score higher on receptive vocabulary — related
- DLLs have smaller vocabularies and slower growth in each language than monolinguals, but comparable conceptual vocabularies — a broader claim this one bears on
- Group differences in receptive language did not hold when controlling for SES, and receptive language was the covariate retained in the main analyses — related
- Simultaneous and sequential DLL learners show opposite vocabulary patterns in English versus the home language — related
- Bilingual children score higher in English than Spanish, with the language effect larger in the expressive modality — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
monolinguals-outperform-bilinguals-single-language-english-vocabulary |
title |
Controlling for SES, monolingual children outperform both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals on single-language English receptive and expressive vocabulary measures |
description |
Controlling for SES, monolingual children outperform both simultaneous and sequential bilinguals on single-language English receptive and expressive vocabulary measures |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
2014 |
source_checked |
2026-10-20 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-17 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — gross-megan-2014, gross-megan-2014-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.