Cited by 485Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and DisordersCategorization, perception, and language

Should I stay or should I switch? A cost-benefit analysis of voluntary language switching in young and aging bilinguals

Open access
Gollan, Tamar H., Ferreira, Victor S.·2009·Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition

Abstract

Bilinguals spontaneously switch languages in conversation even though laboratory studies reveal robust cued language switching costs. The authors investigated how voluntary-switching costs might differ when switches are voluntary. Younger (Experiments 1-2) and older (Experiment 3) Spanish-English bilinguals named pictures in 3 conditions: (a) dominant-language only, (b) nondominant-language only, and (c) using "whatever language comes to mind" (in Experiment 2, "using each language about half the time"). Most bilinguals, particularly balanced bilinguals, voluntarily mixed languages even though switching was costly. Unlike with cued switching, voluntary switching sometimes facilitated responses, switch costs were not greater for the dominant language, and age effects on language mixing and switching were limited. This suggests that the freedom to mix languages voluntarily allows unbalanced and older bilinguals to function more like balanced and younger bilinguals. Voluntary switch costs reveal an expanded role for inhibitory control in bilingual language production and imply a mandatory separation by language in bilingual lexical selection.

Verifying this paper

8 of 9 steps done · this page updates itself — you can leave and come back

  1. Registry recordVerified
  2. Full textRead the full text
  3. Reference list87 references found
  4. Reference checkChecking each cited work — 93 of 93
  5. StatisticsNeeds the full text
  6. ClaimsNeeds the full text
  7. Cited sourcesNeeds claims to check
  8. Self-checkNeeds the full text
  9. VerificationFindings verified

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0014981

Cites

93 of 93 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Bilinguals display consistent deficits on verbal fluency measures, especially semantic fluency, even if they may answer in either language.

    “Performance on these tasks reveals systematic deficits for bilingual participants, particularly in semantic fluency conditions [33–37], even if responses can be provided in either language [38].”

    From Bilingualism: consequences for mind and brain (2012) · cites this paper as [38]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. Baayen RH 2008 Analyzing linguistic data: A practical introduction to statistics Cambridge, England Cambridge University Press
  2. Gumperz JJ 1982 Discourse strategies Cambridge, England Cambridge University Press
  3. Myers-Scotton C 1997 Duelling languages: Grammatical structure in codeswitching Oxford, England Oxford University Press (Original work published 1993)

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gollan, T. H., & Ferreira, V. S.
Affiliations
University of California System (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition
Published
2009
Volume
35
Issue
3
Pages
640-665
ISSN
  • 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1285
OpenAlex
W1990859675
Cited by
485
References
87
Citations by year
2026: 13 · 2025: 21 · 2024: 28 · 2023: 44 · 2022: 27 · 2021: 38 · 2020: 36 · 2019: 50 · 2018: 59 · 2017: 35 · 2016: 27 · 2015: 32 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 20
FWCI
6.77
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
Funders
  • Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01 HD050287)
  • National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders (DC00191)
  • National Institutes of Health (R01 HD051030, P50 AG05131)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
bilingual speech production, switch costs, age effects, Spanish-English bilinguals, code-mixing, inhibitory control, word choice, balanced bilingualism, picture naming
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Aging, Attention, Choice Behavior, Cues, Female, Humans, Language Development, Male, Middle Aged, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Reaction Time, Semantics, Verbal Learning, Volition, Multilingualism, Young Adult

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