Bilinguals and monolinguals do not differ on basic math performance in either experiment¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2017 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Experiment 1 found no significant difference between groups in proportion scores on the basic math task. → Mielicki 2017 q3 i? Experiment 2 likewise found no group difference on the fixed 12-item basic math subset. → Mielicki 2017 (2)

Evidence¶

Mielicki 2017¶

Mielicki, M. K., Kacinik, N. A., & Wiley, J. (2017). Bilingualism and symbolic abstraction: Implications for algebra learning. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.03.002

q3 · i? · associational · r2

In Experiment 1, both groups completed the Woodcock-Johnson III Applied Problems subtest under standard administration. Means were nearly identical and the difference was not significant: "t(59)=0.40,ns".

"There were no significant differences between monolinguals (M =0.59,SD =0.10)andbilinguals(M =0.61,SD =0.19)inproportion scoresonthebasicmathtask;t(59)=0.40,ns."

Mielicki 2017 (2)¶

Mielicki, M. K., Kacinik, N. A., & Wiley, J. (2017). Bilingualism and symbolic abstraction: Implications for algebra learning. Learning and Instruction. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.learninstruc.2017.03.002

q3 · i? · associational · r2

In Experiment 2 all participants received the same 12-item subset of the Applied Problems subtest. The general discussion states the groups "did not differ in performance on the basic math task".

"Bilinguals and monolinguals in the current studies did not differ in performance on the basic math task, which fails to support theideathatbilingualsaregenerallybetteratmath"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Early bilinguals outperform monolinguals on the hard items of the Symbol Math task in Experiment 1 — related
• The bilingual advantage on hard Symbol Math items replicated in Experiment 2 with executive control and SES measures — related