Jason Rothman|Fatih Bayram|Vincent DeLuca|Grazia Di Pisa|Jon Andoni Duñabeitia|Khadij Gharibi|Jiuzhou Hao|Nadine Kolb|Maki Kubota|Tanja Kupisch|Tim Joris Laméris|Alicia Luque|Brechje van Osch|Sergio Miguel Pereira Soares|Yanina Prystauka|Deniz Tat|Aleksandra Tomi?|Toms Voits|Stefanie Wulff
Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “<i>control</i>”: Arguments and alternatives
UiT The Arctic University of Norway|Universidad Nebrija|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|University of Konstanz|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|Universidad Nebrija|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|University of Stavanger|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|University of Konstanz|University of Cambridge|Universidad Nebrija|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|Leiden University|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|UiT The Arctic University of Norway|University of Florida
abstract herein contextualize problematize offer insights moving beyond problem monolingual comparative normativity psycho linguistic research bilingualism argue vast majority cases juxtaposing functional monolinguals bilinguals fails offer comparison supposedly intended meet standards empirical control line scientific method instead default nature monolingual comparative normativity historically contributed inequalities many facets bilingualism research continues impede progress multiple levels beyond framing views matter offer epistemological considerations methodological alternatives standard practice improve empirical rigor fostering increased diversity inclusivity equity field