Cited by 46Language Development and DisordersMultilingual Education and PolicyNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism

Bilingual lexical skills of school-age children with Chinese and Korean heritage languages in the United States

Jia, Gisela, Chen, Jennifer, Kim, HyeYoung, Chan, Phoenix-Shan, Jeung, Changmo·2014·International Journal of Behavioral Development

Abstract

This cross-sectional study investigated the bilingual lexical skills of 175 US school-age children (5 to18 years old) with Cantonese, Mandarin, or Korean as their heritage language (HL), and English as their dominant language. Primary study goals were to identify potential patterns of development in bilingual lexical skills over the elementary to high school time span and to examine the relation of environmental factors to lexical skills. HL and English productive lexical skills were assessed with a Picture Naming and a Verbal Fluency task. English receptive lexical skills were assessed with Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test. A survey obtained information about participants’ language use in six environmental contexts. There were age-related significant increases in both HL and English skills. However, English proficiency already had a significant lead over HL proficiency at the youngest age. English receptive lexical skills reached monolingual expectations from age 8, whereas for HL, high school age participants on average only reached the level of early elementary school monolinguals. Although more English use at home at younger ages was associated with stronger English skills, the relation did not exist for older participants. Instead, among older participants, more English use at home was associated with weaker HL skills. Children’s attendance at HL programs and visits to home countries bore little relation to HL proficiency.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/0165025414533224

Cites

1 of 1 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

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

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Jia, G., Chen, J., Kim, H., Chan, P.-S., & Jeung, C.
Affiliations
  • Lehman College (US)
  • New York University (US)
  • New York University, USA
  • The Graduate Center, CUNY (US)
Corresponding author
Jia, Gisela
Venue
International Journal of Behavioral Development
Published
2014-06-04
Volume
38
Issue
4
Pages
350-358
ISSN
  • 0165-0254 (ISSN-L)
  • 1464-0651
OpenAlex
W2333533857
Cited by
46
References
1
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 1
FWCI
3.91
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Behavioral Development (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Linguistics and Language › Multilingual Education and Policy
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Keywords
heritage language, Chinese heritage language, Cantonese, mandarin, English proficiency, picture naming, verbal fluency, receptive vocabulary, home language use, heritage language programs, elementary school students

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