Cited by 1,730Reading and Literacy DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

The architecture of the bilingual word recognition system: From identification to decision

Open access
Dijkstra, Ton, van Heuven, Walter J.B.·2002·Bilingualism: Language and Cognition

Abstract

The paper opens with an evaluation of the BIA model of bilingual word recognition in the light of recent empirical evidence. After pointing out problems and omissions, a new model, called the BIA+, is proposed. Structurally, this new model extends the old one by adding phonological and semantic lexical representations to the available orthographic ones, and assigns a different role to the so-called language nodes. Furthermore, it makes a distinction between the effects of non-linguistic context (such as instruction and stimulus list composition) and linguistic context (such as the semantic and syntactic effects of sentence context), based on a distinction between the word identification system itself and a task/decision system that regulates control. At the end of the paper, the generalizability of the BIA+ model to different tasks and modalities is discussed.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s1366728902003012

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The languages of an active bilingual are activated simultaneously and influence each other reciprocally.

    “the nature of bilingualism is such that the languages of an active bilingual are activated simultaneously (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002; Schwartz and Kroll, 2006) and influence each other reciprocally (Grosjean, 1989; Cook, 1999, 2003; Flege et al., 2003).”

    From Plasticity, Variability and Age in Second Language Acquisition and Bilingualism (2018) · cites this paper as Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dijkstra, T., & van Heuven, W. J. B.
Affiliations
Radboud University Nijmegen (NL)
Venue
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
Published
2002-12
Volume
5
Issue
3
Pages
175-197
ISSN
  • 1366-7289 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-1841
OpenAlex
W2011035448
Cited by
1,730
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 98 · 2025: 123 · 2024: 87 · 2023: 103 · 2022: 127 · 2021: 118 · 2020: 96 · 2019: 163 · 2018: 124 · 2017: 83 · 2016: 87 · 2015: 89 · 2014: 49 · 2013: 62 · 2012: 64
FWCI
21.21
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Bilingualism Language and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion)
  • Radboud Repository (Radboud University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
bilingual word recognition, BIA+ model, lexical access, phonological representation, semantic representation, task control, decision-making systems, orthographic representation, cross-lingual generalization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review