Cited by 122Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismLanguage Development and Disorders

Reasoning about other people's beliefs: Bilinguals have an advantage.

Rubio-Fernández, Paula, Glucksberg, Sam·2012·Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition

Abstract

Bilingualism can have widespread cognitive effects. In this article we investigate whether bilingualism might have an effect on adults' abilities to reason about other people's beliefs. In particular, we tested whether bilingual adults might have an advantage over monolingual adults in false-belief reasoning analogous to the advantage that has been observed with bilingual children. Using a traditional false-belief task coupled with an eye-tracking technique, we found that adults in general suffer interference from their own perspective when reasoning about other people's beliefs. However, bilinguals are reliably less susceptible to this egocentric bias than are monolinguals. Moreover, performance on the false-belief task significantly correlated with performance on an executive control task. We argue that bilinguals' early sociolinguistic sensitivity and enhanced executive control may account for their advantage in false-belief reasoning.

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/a0025162

Cites

4 of 4 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?

  • This pattern-bilingual advantage on conflict tasks and no difference on non-conflict tasks-has been replicated in children and adults with flanker, theory of mind, and Simon tasks.

    “This pattern has been confirmed in studies of both children and adults using a flanker task (children: [74, 75]), theory of mind task (children: [76, 77]; adults: [78]), Simon task (children: [79]; adults: [44]).”

    From Bilingualism: consequences for mind and brain (2012) · cites this paper as [78]

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

Authors
Rubio-Fernández, P., & Glucksberg, S.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
Venue
Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition
Published
2012
Volume
38
Issue
1
Pages
211-217
ISSN
  • 0278-7393 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1285
OpenAlex
W2039264326
Cited by
122
References
4
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 13 · 2021: 14 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 3
FWCI
8.53
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Experimental Psychology Learning Memory and Cognition (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • UCL Discovery (University College London) (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • British Academy
  • Marie Curie Outgoing International Fellowship (022149)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
bilingualism, false belief reasoning, theory of mind, egocentric bias, perspective taking, executive function, monolinguals, cognitive effects of bilingualism
MeSH terms
Analysis of Variance, Attention, Culture, Eye Movements, Female, Humans, Male, Neuropsychological Tests, Problem Solving, Reaction Time, Statistics as Topic, Vocabulary, Multilingualism, Theory of Mind

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