A bright future for interdisciplinary multilingualism research,

This art icle was downloaded by: [ Universit y College London] On: 22 August 2015, At : 08: 24 Publisher: Rout ledge I nform a Lt d Regist ered in England and Wales Regist ered Num ber: 1072954 Regist ered office: 5 Howick Place, London, SW1P 1WG International Journal of Multilingualism Publicat ion det ails, including inst ruct ions f or aut hors and subscript ion inf ormat ion: ht t p: / / www. t andf online. com/ loi/ rmj m20 A bright future for interdisciplinary multilingualism research a Ruxandra-S. Comanaru & Jean-Marc Dewaele a a Depart ment of Applied Linguist ics and Communicat ion, Birkbeck College, Universit y of London, 26 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DQ, UK Published online: 18 Aug 2015. Click for updates To cite this article: Ruxandra-S. Comanaru & Jean-Marc Dewaele (2015): A bright f ut ure f or int erdisciplinary mult ilingualism research, Int ernat ional Journal of Mult ilingualism, DOI: 10. 1080/ 14790718. 2015. 1071016 To link to this article: ht t p: / / dx. doi. org/ 10. 1080/ 14790718. 2015. 1071016 PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTI CLE Taylor & Francis m akes every effort t o ensure t he accuracy of all t he inform at ion ( t he “ Cont ent ” ) cont ained in t he publicat ions on our plat form . However, Taylor & Francis, our agent s, and our licensors m ake no represent at ions or warrant ies what soever as t o t he accuracy, com plet eness, or suit abilit y for any purpose of t he Cont ent . Any opinions and views expressed in t his publicat ion are t he opinions and views of t he aut hors, and are not t he views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of t he Cont ent should not be relied upon and should be independent ly verified wit h prim ary sources of inform at ion. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, act ions, claim s, proceedings, dem ands, cost s, expenses, dam ages, and ot her liabilit ies what soever or howsoever caused arising direct ly or indirect ly in connect ion wit h, in relat ion t o or arising out of t he use of t he Cont ent . This art icle m ay be used for research, t eaching, and privat e st udy purposes. Any subst ant ial or syst em at ic reproduct ion, redist ribut ion, reselling, loan, sub- licensing, syst em at ic supply, or dist ribut ion in any form t o anyone is expressly forbidden. Term s & Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 Condit ions of access and use can be found at ht t p: / / www.t andfonline.com / page/ t erm sand- condit ions International Journal of Multilingualism, 2015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2015.1071016 A bright future for interdisciplinary multilingualism research Ruxandra-S. Comanaru* and Jean-Marc Dewaele Department of Applied Linguistics and Communication, Birkbeck College, University of London, 26 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DQ, UK Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 (Received 1 December 2014; accepted 23 June 2015) Multilingualism is a prevalent reality in today’s world. From an individual level to a societal one, multilingualism incorporates many aspects that have been studied extensively by diverse social research disciplines. The present article will explore the potential directions which multilingualism research can take, concentrating mainly on the benefits of the integration of psychological methods in mainstream multilingualism research. We propose that a closer collaboration between psychologists and applied linguists is necessary for the advancement of the field of multilingualism. The integration of the themes and methodologies of the two social sciences will be advantageous to both. The diverse methodological approaches should not be viewed as a hindrance for the development of multilingual research, but rather as an asset. Linguists and psychologists can draw on each other’s methodological expertise since many of the research questions asked are comparable and complementary. Keywords: Multilingualism; interdisciplinarity; emotions; language acquisition; linguistic identity Introduction Multilingualism research has been at the busy intersection between various areas of psychology and applied linguistics for many decades now. Researchers in these fields have been concerned with understanding not only how languages are acquired and used by individuals, but also what effect the pervasiveness of multiple languages has on groups of people and on the overall society. Individual and societal characteristics of multilingualism have been addressed in both social sciences (Cenoz, 2013). Many studies emerged from linguistically diverse areas, such as Canada, the USA and Europe, and more recently South East Asia and Africa. As early as the 1960s, Canadian social researchers began investigating various issues of bilingualism and minority languages, particularly in the province of Quebec, because of the linguistic situation that this area presents. Gardner, Giles and Lambert are just some of the important names in social psychology that have dedicated their careers to studying various aspects multilingualism. They recognised the importance of understanding the context when exploring multilingualism and the Canadian context proved to be a prolific ambient for this type of research. The Canadian tradition of studying multilingualism from a social psychological perspective has continued and expanded until *Email: r.comanaru@bbk.ac.uk © 2015 Taylor & Francis Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 2 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele today (see Noels, Clément, MacIntyre and many others). Nonetheless, in the Canadian context multilingualism has also been addressed in other psychological contexts, such as developmental, cognitive and applied psychology and other branches of psychology, as well as education studies. Researchers such as Ellen Bialystock, Merrill Swain, Jim Cummins and Fred Genesee have dedicated their careers to the study of bilingualism and multilingualism in this context. Over the years, the Canadian interest and tradition in multilingualism research has spread everywhere. Nowadays, the interest in multilingualism is reflected in the myriad of research projects undertaken all over the world. The interest in multilingualism arises from the fact that not only is multilingualism widespread throughout the world (Bhatia & Ritchie, 2008), but also as Grosjean (2010) suggests, it is a phenomenon that is encountered in all social classes, all ages and all countries. It transcends boundaries between people and societies. Being able to communicate with others in a different language has social, political and economic benefits, both for the individuals and for entire linguistic communities. This ability to share ideas, thoughts and knowledge helps build stronger, more prosperous societies. And, as much recent research suggests, multilingualism has cognitive benefits for individuals over their lifespan (Luk, Bialystok, Craik, & Grady, 2011). Defining multilingualism The term multilingualism has been used in opposition to monolingualism, although sometimes it denotes the knowledge of two languages, while other times it is used with a connotation of proficiency in three or more languages (see Butler, 2012, for a discussion; and Jessner, 2008, for a historical overview). Although we are aware of the differences reported between bilinguals, trilinguals and multilinguals in general, for the purposes of this paper the term multilingualism will embrace all of them and will be used to denote proficiency to various degrees in more than one language. In consecutive editions of the same book, Baker (2006, 2011) alters his terminology from ‘advantages of trilingualism’ (Baker, 2006, p. 108) to the ‘advantages of multilingualism’ (Baker, 2011, p. 105). This suggests that the term multilingualism can be viewed as an all-encompassing term, referring to knowledge of two or more languages ‘in a broad, inclusive sense’ (Aronin & Singleton, 2012, p. 7). There has also been extensive debate about when we can consider a person to be bilingual or multilingual. Although it is not the scope of this article to delve into this debate, it is important to mention the two extremes of the definition of bilingualism, and thus extrapolate to multilingualism. Edwards (2006) suggests that anybody who can utter a phrase or a sentence in another language can be considered to be bilingual to some degree. He later discusses this ‘question of degree’ (p. 8, emphasis in the original) and highlights the many aspects and traits of bilingualism that need to be taken into account when assessing the degree of multilingualism. He discusses how some people might be balanced in their knowledge of more languages, meaning that they could function easily in any of the languages known, while others can be assigned the non-fluent bilingual category. Edwards (2006) also provides a comprehensive list of typologies assigned to bilingualism (and multilingualism). These include the receptive–productive categories, the additive–subtractive, primary–secondary and so on. This discussion on bilingualism provides glimpses into the complex nature of the research in multilingualism. Edwards’ review of research on multilingualism points to the variety of issues Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 3 around this topic and the need to have an accord in terminology across disciplines and researchers. In the same book, Bhatia (2006) makes an interesting remark discussed later by Gass (2013). He suggests that the process of acquiring a second language is equivalent with becoming bilingual. Gass (2013) interprets this as Bhatia’s proposition that the outcome of Second Language Acquisition (SLA) is a bilingual speaker, contrasting it with Edwards’ definition, which implies that the person can be considered bilingual at any stage in the process of acquiring another language. The understanding of bilingualism, and thus multilingualism, from these two perspectives is surprisingly divergent, pointing either to a step in the process or to the final result of this process, and thus to acquiring an almost native-like fluency in the second language (L2) (Gass, 2013). The breath of work in the field of multilingualism requires agreement about what the exact object of study is. For this reason, the practice usually employed in social psychology of operationally defining variables is of utmost importance in order to ensure the consistency of terminology and research. Even concepts that appear to be forthright, such as bilingualism and multilingualism, incorporate subtle, but crucial nuances and are very difficult to operationalise.1 We will continue our discussion by addressing some of research questions asked by psychologists and linguists with respect to multilingualism, and then delve into a discussion on the methodological approaches engaged by both sciences in the pursuit of these research questions. We will conclude our discussion by addressing potential tension points, attempting to offer possible solutions and proposing some advice for future research in multilingualism. Research questions The research on multilingualism in applied linguistics and (social) psychology has addressed similar research questions, although at times from different perspectives and employing a variety of methodologies. These questions are sometimes formulated in distinct ways in linguistics, but address the same issues and are relevant to both sciences. In this section, we will explore the ways in which multilingualism and language acquisition has been discussed in both fields. We will then offer some examples of the nuances that the same research topics acquire when studied by linguists and compare them to the same topics addressed from a psychological perspective. This exercise will allow the reader to understand the similarities and differences in the way the research questions are asked in both fields of study, and in the actual topics addressed. Multilingual acquisition Much of the research in both psychology and linguistics has focused on SLA and on ultimate L2 attainment. Butler (2012) addresses the intersection between multilingualism and SLA by examining issues of proficiency, age of L2 acquisition and linguistic influences on SLA. She discusses how recently the fields of SLA and multilingualism have attempted to unify their efforts and scope. As any endeavour to bring together two different research traditions, it has led to tensions between the two; namely, the multilingualism researchers have questioned the normativity of the native speaker (the monolingual bias) (Pavlenko, 2005). Conversely, SLA researchers have addressed the bilingual bias, that is, the assumption that bilinguals and multilinguals are affected Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 4 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele by similar processes. Butler’s (2012) discussion sheds light on the complexity of multilingualism research even within the field of linguistics. How then are we to believe that multilingualism could bring together linguists and psychologists to uncover its intricacies in a harmonious manner? This section will present various areas of multilingualism that have drawn the researchers’ attention. This list is just an illustration whose aim is to provide the reader with an overview of the myriad of sub-areas of multilingualism. Within the psychological tradition, multilingualism has been studied from varied perspectives. Often, theories from social psychology have been adapted to language learning and multilingualism. For example, the theories of motivation have permeated from cognitive or developmental psychology into social psychology and the psychology of language. Within the field of psychology, motivation is a stand-alone area, which deals with the antecedents and outcomes that have an effect on a person’s interest and desire to pursue an activity or a goal. To exemplify this, let us consider the SelfDetermination Theory, put forth by Deci and Ryan (1985). This theory was adapted successfully by Dörnyei (2005, 2009), and by Noels, Clément, and Pelletier (1999; Comanaru & Noels, 2009; Noels & Giles, 2009; Noels, Pelletier, Clément, & Vallerand, 2003) to address motivation for language learning in different contexts and circumstances. Others have transposed theories of cognitive development to the study of language acquisition (much of the research undertaken by Bialystok and her colleagues has dealt with developmental aspects of language learning). Other notable fields include neurolinguistics (covering studies on brain injured patients, using brain imaging to map language learning centres in the brain). The development of new trends within the field of psychology of learning has provided new perspectives on language learning, taking into account issues relating to the environment of learning, conditioning and reinforcement of behaviour. One of these new trends has led to the establishment of information processing, a theory emerging from cognitive and developmental psychology, using computational models of learning, which suggests that information is processed and is not just a response to stimuli from the environment. Within the field of multilingualism, this has translated into studies looking, for example, at metalinguistic awareness in SLA, where the multilingual learner develops a meta-understanding of language, which was shown to be beneficial in language acquisition (Cummins, 1978). Collaborations between personality psychologists and applied linguists have also allowed the development of a better understanding of individual differences in multilingual language learning and use (Dewaele, 2012; Dewaele & Furnham, 1999; Dewaele, Petrides, & Furnham, 2008). This growing body of work has addressed multilingualism from a psychological perspective. Multilingualism and emotion The area of research on multilingualism and emotion has benefited from collaboration and interaction between cognitive psychologists, psycholinguists and applied linguists. Cognitive psychologists have focused on how bilinguals’ process emotion words. Dependent variables include reaction times (RTs) and error rates (Altarriba & Basnight-Brown, 2012). Other studies have looked at the variable skin conductance response (SCR) using lie-detector technology (Caldwell-Harris & Ayçiçeği-Dinn, 2009; Caldwell-Harris, Tong, Lung, & Poo, 2011). This technology allows researchers to measure the Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 5 reactions of bilinguals to emotion words in their two languages. Emotional word Stroop tasks have also been used to detect differences between monolinguals and bilinguals (Eilola & Havelka, 2011). While the classic Stroop test creates a conflict between an incongruent colour and a printed word (the word ‘GREEN’ in font colour red), the emotional Stroop looks to what extent emotional words cause the participant to slow down compared to neutral words. Another interesting dependent variable is the socalled emotion memory effect (emotion words are typically recalled more frequently than neutral words) among bilinguals and monolinguals (Caldwell-Harris & Ayçiçeği-Dinn, 2009). Duñabeitia and Costa (2014) focused on physiological reactions among Spaniards lying in English L2. Lying in L2 elicited larger pupil dilations and longer speech durations compared to Spanish L1. There was no interaction between the two effects suggesting that the processing cost associated with deception is similar in L1 and L2. The studies mentioned here indicate that the field of multilingualism profits greatly from embracing variables and methods used in psychology. These approaches have enriched our understanding of the emotions of multilinguals, using experimental and empirical data to support their claims. A more applied linguistic way of looking at the link between multilingualism and emotion is through online questionnaires including closed and open questions on perceptions towards an individual’s various languages, language preferences for specific emotional speech acts, such as communicating feelings or anger, swearing, addressing children and cognitive operations, such as performing mental calculations and using inner speech (Dewaele, 2011, 2013; Pavlenko, 2005). The self-reported data obtained through questionnaires allows researchers to better grasp multilinguals’ perceptions about their emotions and their understanding of the relationship between emotion and language. A review of this literature suggests that affective processing in the L1 is more automatic than in the L2, hence fewer interference effects and less SCRs to taboo emotional stimuli in the L2 (Pavlenko, 2012). Late bilinguals often feel that their languages are differentially embodied, with languages learnt later in life processed semantically but not affectively which would explain why swearwords and expressions of love in the L2 seem to be more emotionally powerful (Dewaele, 2013). Within the field of multilingualism and emotion, exciting new research has looked at the effect of emotion on decision-taking and moral judgements in the L1 and L2 of bilinguals (Costa et al., 2014). Moral judgements are elicited through questions such as: ‘Should you sacrifice one man to save five?’ Costa et al. (2014) found that participants using a foreign language made substantially more utilitarian decisions when faced with such moral dilemmas (i.e. they were more likely to approve of the sacrifice). Ayçiçeği-Dinn, Sisman, and Caldwell-Harris (forthcoming) looked at decisionmaking and agreement with selfish choices for foreign-language dilemmas in L1 and L2 versions among Turkish English bilinguals. Much research also addresses multiple language socialisation and the benefits brought by multilingualism to the cognitive and emotional development of children. In her research, Bialystok (1987; Bialystok, Luk, & Kwan, 2005) found that multilingual children have more nuanced comprehension of metalinguistic awareness, better reading skills, better ability to detect grammatical or syntactical errors, and many more. Dewaele and van Oudenhoven (2009) in their study of London teenagers found that multilingual teenagers display more openmindedness and cultural empathy than the teenagers who were dominant in just one language. This pattern 6 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 was confirmed in Dewaele and Stavans (2014) which was based on a large Israeli sample. Chen, Kennedy, and Zhou (2012) reviewed extensive literature from psychology and linguistics on the topic of emotions in multilingual families. They suggest that there is considerable research in the field, which deals with the expression and discussion of emotions in the family. They conclude that the topic of multilinguals’ emotions would benefit greatly from more empirical research and tools originating from social psychology. They advocate for an interdisciplinary approach to emotions in multilingual families and even beyond the family unit. Multilingualism and identity Identity is constructed through language and possibly language plays an important role in identity construction. This circular relationship means that in order to understand the identity of multilinguals, we need to first understand their multilingualism. Joseph (2004) argues that language and identity are ‘ultimately inseparable’ (p. 8). The construction and negotiation of identity through language has been of interest to linguists and psychologists alike. In the case of multilinguals, the issue of identity becomes even more complex. Social identity has been defined by Tajfel as ‘the individual’s knowledge that he belongs to certain social groups together with some emotional and value significance to him of the group membership’ (1974, p. 31). This definition incorporates three different facets that characterise the social identity from a socio-psychological perspective: the cognitive (the awareness of belongingness), the affective (the emotional value one attaches to this belonging) and the evaluative dimensions (the assignation of a positive or negative value to the group membership). The multilingual individual has the opportunity to develop various memberships in different language groups, and this comes about together with the cognitive, affective and evaluative characteristics of the membership in different linguistic groups. As Lambert (1974) suggests, not only does that imply that s/he may become a subtractive or additive bilingual, but also a subtractive or additive bicultural (and thus, multicultural) individual. Many studies have assessed the role of the context in the formation of identity of speakers of various languages. Yip (2005), for example, found that different identities become salient depending on the contextual cues, such as the language spoken and the presence of family members. She argued that various aspects of the bicultural ethnic identity are activated depending on the linguistic context. In a more elaborate model, Clément and Noels (1992) suggest that identity is situated, contingent on the immediate social interaction. This approach is based on the idea that an individual not only has multiple self-representations, but also that his or her feelings of belonging may vary depending on the immediate situation, defined in terms of the setting where the encounter takes place, the activity in which the individual is engaged, and the focus of the interaction (Clément & Noels, 1992). Thus, the individual’s ability to communicate in multiple languages has a direct effect on his/her sense of belongingness to various ethnic and linguistic groups. Studies looking at bicultural identity have consistently found that proficiency and confidence in using both languages are factors that correlate with feelings of belonging to cultural, ethnic and linguistic groups (Comanaru & Noels, 2014). From this perspective, the context, including the linguistic aspect of context, can be assessed as a variable and introduced in various models of identity of multilinguals. Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 7 However, critiques of this approach suggest that identity and context cannot be separated and should be studied together. From this social constructivist perspective, identity is a process and not a finite state. Norton (1997) for example, defines identity as ‘how people understand their relationship to the world, how that relationship is constructed across time and space, and how people understand their possibilities for the future’ (p. 410). She thus takes an inclusive perspective, indicating the importance of the temporal and spatial dimensions of identity, and the negotiation that takes place between the individual and the world he/she lives in through social interactions. Norton (2000) describes immigrant women in Canada and their experience of becoming multilingual through the English learning process and finds in their narratives that their identity is in constant change over time and space, but it is reproduced over and over in their social interactions. The extensive research conducted within social psychology on issues related to the identity of multilingual individuals can inform future research carried out from a more linguistic perspective. Both approaches, the social constructivist and the positivist approach to identity, have a long and valuable tradition of investigating multilingualism. Multilingual education Migration and its effects on society is a very interdisciplinary topic, being tackled in the social sciences from many different perspectives. Social psychologists, sociologists, political scientists, economists and linguists alike attempt to understand the intricate patterns and relationships that appear in a society with high immigration rates. The diverse multilingual and multicultural backgrounds that most immigrants have offered researchers a unique opportunity to investigate these relationships, and educational contexts have provided a fertile ground for investigation (Garcia & Wei, 2014). European migration has been a topic of controversial discussions in the media in recent years. Often, right-wing media and politicians have proposed that immigration has a negative effect on society in general, and in particular on the educational system. However, when these issues are investigated in a scientific manner, the story that comes to light is different (Garcia & Wei, 2014). A recent study found that the proportion of multilingual/immigrant children in each class has no effect on the educational attainment of the non-immigrant children in the class (Ohinata & van Ours, 2013). The research was conducted in the Netherlands and the authors maintain that although the learning environment might be perceived by the Dutch students as more challenging, the results on the reading, sciences and Maths scores are comparable between homogenous and heterogeneous classes. Extrapolating from these findings, we could suggest that a multilingual educational system can be beneficial to all students, not only from an academic perspective, but also from a cultural one, exposing children from a young age to multiple languages and cultures, and allowing them to transcend these artificial borders. Migration is not the only factor that needs to be accounted for when discussing multilingualism in education. Some parts of the world multiple languages co-exist. Earlier we mentioned Francophone Canada. Some European examples include Catalonia and the Basque Country in Spain, and Wales. Although Belgium is often added to the list, it could be argued that it really consists of officially monoglot regions, with smaller mixed areas. Each of these contexts presents an intricate amalgamation of traditions, histories, languages and societies. Nonetheless, the common denominator is the presence of one or more minority languages in a linguistically different 8 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 environment. Previous studies on ethnolinguistic vitality have indicated that maintenance of the heritage language correlates strongly with other measures of well-being. Proficiency in the majority language can also be beneficial, particularly for integrating in the larger society and for gaining economic benefits. Cenoz (2009) provides a detailed explanation of the multilingual educational system in the Basque Country. The model proposed by Cenoz (2009) called the Continua of Multilingual Education addresses multiple axes of continuity, such as educational, linguistic and sociolinguistic variables, on both micro and macro levels. In her research, Cenoz found that multiple languages of instruction have a strong effect on the linguistic identity of the students, providing a breeding ground for more positive attitudes to multilingualism. Here, Cenoz also advocates for an interdisciplinary methodology to studying multilingual education, suggesting that the field would benefit from more qualitative research. Methodologies and epistemological approaches in multilingualism The most divergent aspect when looking at multilingualism from a social psychological and applied linguistic perspective is the epistemology and methodology employed to collect data. The methods used in applied linguistics tend to be more emic and qualitative, often inspired from postmodern theory (see e.g. Kramsch, 2012). Epistemologically, applied linguists working in this tradition attempt to build theories based on qualitative data. In this approach, researchers use data collected through various means to reach conclusions about specific multilinguals, taking their complex socio-historical context into account. Most social psychological methods come from a more etic perspective, using induction to understand and compare social processes. This approach is more quantitative in nature, and it is concerned with generalisability and comparing groups of individuals on certain variables across time and context. The starting points in this methodological tradition are hypotheses, and the data are used to confirm or refute these hypotheses. As one might expect, many researchers from both fields have crossed over to the other side from a methodological point of view and have attempted to combine these methodological traditions (see e.g. Dewaele, 2010; Dörnyei, MacIntyre, & Henry, 2014; Todeva & Cenoz, 2009). Multilingualism would have a lot to gain from the combined efforts of social psychologists and applied linguists and we suggest that part-taking in this endeavour is not only possible, but crucial for the future of multilingualism research. To start with, we must consider the fact that both psychologists and linguists study the same population, namely the world’s many multilinguals. In recent years, social psychologists have become increasingly aware of the importance of context in multilingualism research and have strived to include it, at least as a variable, in their studies. People do not exist in isolation; rather they are part of a milieu of social contexts, which shape them. Moreover, as discussed above, they have increasingly realised the environment’s impact on multilinguals’ identities and their performance of these identities. Intuitively, it is clear that various factors present in our immediate context influence the development of multilingualism at an individual level, as well as at the societal level. On a micro level, intermarriage, migration and relocation for various reasons (economic, political, social and environmental), foreign or SLA and many more, constitute circumstances, which might lead an individual to become multilingual. Sometimes individuals have a choice, sometimes they do not. On a macro level, migration, economic factors changing borders and the political reshaping of the world, all converge to create a breeding ground for the global development of Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 9 multilingualism. Certainly, there is a direct correspondence between the micro and macro levels, and their reciprocal influence should not require more clarifications. Whether we are concerned with individual or group multilingualism from a psychological or applied linguistic perspective, the focus is on the same population. As Noels (2014) suggests, sharing methodological approaches between social psychologists and applied linguists would be beneficial to both sciences, as it would provide us with ‘a wider diversity of analytical tools to answer a broader range of questions’ (p. 88). She advocates for an interdisciplinary perspective on topics of interest to psychologists and applied linguists, and suggests that sharing methodologies between the two fields would be beneficial and would bring about more development in the field of multilingualism. Although the topic of her article is language and ethnic identity, many of the methodological considerations presented by Noels (2014) provide insight into the convergent points of the fields discussed here. She goes on to describe multiple methodologies, which have been used in social psychology to address issues related to language learning and identity. We will now describe some methodologies and discuss their application to the study of multilingualism. One of the representative methods originating in the field of psychology is the experimental method. For example, within the theoretical framework of Cultural Frame-Switching (Hong, Morris, Chiu, & Benet-Martinez, 2000), many studies have investigated the effect of language priming on identity. These experiments present the participants with culture-specific symbols, in order to prime a particular identity, which is then measured on other identity-related variables. Chen, BenetMartínez, and Bond (2008) have looked specifically at the priming effects of language on the cultural identification of Chinese–English bilinguals. Other experiments have been conducted to investigate the cognitive effect of multiple languages for one person. Experiments using techniques such as the Stroop-type RT tests discussed earlier have also been used to study multilinguals and how they use multiple languages. These studies are evidence that experimental research can be employed for the study of multilingualism and its effects. Critics of this methodology argue that the conditions present in a lab do not reflect the real life. Supporters, however, suggest that in the lab, the researcher can control and account for many variables which cannot be measured and controlled in a naturalistic setting. Future studies could continue to use these methodologies and expand them. One of the methodologies most employed in social research are surveys and questionnaires. Unlike experimental methods, surveys offer the possibility of collecting data in a more natural, less constrained setting, yet allowing precise measurement, and data that are both reliable and replicable (Dörnyei, 2007, p. 34). This methodology allows participants to self-report their experiences, attitudes and beliefs. Whether paper and pen questionnaires, online, mail or telephone, and even structured interviews, this methodology allows for collections of large data sets, as well as comparison between groups of people. The statistical sciences have developed important safeguards, which researchers can employ to ensure that the data collected presents an accurate portrait of the participants and can be used for comparing different groups on various variables. Wilson and Dewaele (2010) discuss the benefits of web questionnaires in SLA and bilingualism research over the classic pen and paper method. They present two case studies, which reflect the advantages and some potential drawbacks of online data collection. The authors draw attention to the fact that although the samples might not be representative of the entire population, they offer a valid and reliable way of studying certain segments of the population, and as long as the Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 10 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele researcher is aware of the limitations of this type of research, it offers a non-expensive and rapid way of gathering large sets of data. Thus, the fact that the samples are more entirely representative of the population can be balanced by the possibility of gathering substantial amounts of data. Nonetheless, as Harzing (2006) points out, there are some aspects that need to be taken into account when conducting questionnaire research in a multilingual setting. Her study comparing response styles of participants in 26 countries suggests that there are many factors, which influence the way people respond to questionnaires, including language. For multilingual respondents particularly, Harzing (2006) found that the language of the questionnaire elicits various response styles, such that in English the answers on Likert-type scales were less extreme than in the participants’ native language. Similarly, other studies have found that language has a cultural priming effect on multilinguals (see research conducted by Benet-Martínez, Leu, Lee, & Morris, 2002). Thus, when conducting survey research with multilinguals, we must keep in mind that there are potential pitfalls, depending on the language used. However, survey methodologies are significantly less expensive, and allow for faster collection of considerable amounts of data in a relatively short time. A more time-consuming methodology, which is already at the confluence of the quantitative and qualitative perspectives, uses diaries to record people’s experiences in various contexts. This longitudinal research can be in some cases ethnographic in nature. Under this methodology, participants who are enrolled in the study are asked to fill out standardised diaries or record their experiences in free form with regards to a particular activity, such as language learning or use. Researchers then can analyse the data quantitatively or qualitatively, depending on the type of diary used. Some might argue that there is a risk of self-selection bias in using this methodology, meaning that the participants who fill out the diaries might be the ones interested in the topic of research, for example. However, studies that used this methodology in the past have provided much evidence of its usefulness, especially since the researcher obtains information in the moment, rather than recalled later (for examples of diary studies in the study abroad context, see Kinginger, 2008). The use of diary studies in multilingualism can be employed to collect ethnographic data, but also short survey data in a longitudinal manner. These types of data could be paired together and analysed in light of the same theories, and such provide the researcher with a composite of linguistic and psychological data collected at the same point in time under the same circumstances. Another method used particularly in the more qualitative social psychology research is ethnographic observation. In this case the researcher immerses him/ herself in the context of study and attempts to observe participants in their daily interactions and social contexts in order to achieve an in-depth understanding of the participants and their contexts. Supporters of this method argue that using ethnographic observation, one can avoid the participant biases, and allow for the study of multilingualism without altering the context and including it into the research outcome (Blommaert, Collins, & Slembrouck, 2005). Others, however, argue that the mere presence of the researcher in the context alters it, or that the researcher filters the information gathered through his/her own lens (observer’s bias). There are some researchers in the field of multilingualism and language acquisition who have crossed the methodological divide between quantitative and qualitative approaches to research. One of them is Zoltán Dörnyei, who developed and tested the second language motivational self-system, which has received much attention in Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 11 social psychology and linguistics alike. This model purports that the ideal and the ought-to self have a great influence on the language learning outcome, and thus in the transition between monolingualism and multilingualism. Dörnyei and many others have consistently used social psychological methods, such as surveys, to test this model and validate it across languages and cultures (2005, 2009; Dörnyei & Ushioda, 2009). Recently, Dörnyei has attempted to incorporate more qualitative methodologies into the study of foreign language acquisition (2014). His new approach attempts to better understand L2 acquisition using the dynamic systems perspective. The definition of this system is explained here in simple terms: ‘(a) it has at least two or more elements that are (b) interlinked with each other but which also (c) change independently over time’ (Dörnyei, 2014, p. 81; see this article for a detailed explanation of Dynamic Systems Theory – DST). In this paper, Dörnyei proposes a new methodology called retrodictive qualitative modelling (RQM), which as its name suggests, does not start off attempting to predict an outcome, but rather works backwards from the outcome, unravelling the processes that have led to it in a qualitative manner. Dörnyei et al. (2014) have brought together a number of studies that use DST as the epistemological basis for conceptualising motivation. The authors focus on individual motivational trajectories in SLA. They reject the assumption ‘that truth is found in the study of inter-individual variability among large numbers of subjects’ and argue against the notions of ‘single causes, linear causality, immutable categories, and highly specified endpoints’. Although DST and RQM represent a novel theoretical model and methodology, respectively, for the study of language acquisition and multilingualism, they offer a different and new perspective, including different timescales, which could be embraced by future research. Another perspective on foreign language learning comes from Ema Ushioda, who advocates the ‘person-in-context’ model. This model proposes that researchers should not view multilinguals and language learners as a collection of attributes that exist on a theoretical level, but rather attempt to understand them in context. Ushioda (2009) suggests that context does not exist outside of the individuals, and thus people and the context they live in should be considered as a unit and should be studied together. This perspective is also qualitative and advocates for the incorporation of the study of context when attempting to understand multilinguals. Traditionally, and particularly in social psychology research, the context has been incorporated in the research as separate variables. For example, surveys usually contain a background information section about the participants, which asks them to provide information about their linguistic history and background. As Noels (2014) suggests, this information is qualitative in nature and provides an important framework for the rest of the quantitative data collected. Conversely, Ushioda proposed through this model that the context should not be treated as a separate parameter. We have attempted to present and comment here on various methodologies from psychology, which have been used extensively to study aspects of language and multilingualism. The long psychological tradition of using them has allowed for their refinement over time and tuning to the specific needs of the researcher. As discussed earlier, the research questions asked in the field of multilingualism present comparable and complementary themes in linguistics and social psychology. The use of these methods could (further) enrich more linguistic-oriented studies on multilingualism. Many researchers have realised that there are extensive benefits from using mixed methods. By using qualitative and quantitative methods, one can minimise the risk of various biases. As all social 12 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele science methodologies, there are pros and cons to the use of each and every one of them; however, the cons can be offset by combining various methodologies. For example, endeavouring to use surveys and observations to answer the same research question would allow one to counteract the self-selection bias, but also the observer’s bias, thus providing a more nuanced representation of the results. Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 Conclusion Multilingualism is a reality in every part of the world today (Cenoz, 2013). It has been the topic of interest for many years in various social sciences and what we attempted to point out in this article is that it would be beneficial, and even necessary, for social psychologists and applied linguists to collaborate, or to expand the existing collaborations in order to better understand the many aspects of this complex and prevalent phenomenon, and to present proper triangulation2 of the multilingual phenomena. Although social psychology and applied linguistics might tackle multilingualism from different epistemological perspectives, from a methodological standpoint the study of multilingualism would benefit greatly from an interdisciplinary approach. Triangulating the methods used and drawing on established methods from both disciplines would enhance our understanding of multilingual phenomena and would allow for a rapid and radical advancement in this field. The research topics covered by the researchers from both disciplines already show significant overlap, however the different methodologies create profound divides. We argue that a better communication and collaboration between psychologists and applied linguists could lead the field of multilingualism to yet unimagined territories. The collaboration between social psychologists and applied linguists could also enrich social psychology. The different epistemological and methodological approaches to tackle multilingualism topics might present a challenge, but as we have demonstrated, there are already many examples of successful interdisciplinary collaborations. The future of multilingualism research will be even brighter if we pursue this path. Disclosure statement No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors. Notes 1. We are aware of the lively, ongoing debate on issues of definition of key concepts within the field of multilingualism research (see Aronin & Singleton, 2012; Garcia & Wei, 2014; Hammarberg, 2010; Stavans & Hofmann, 2015). 2. An approach which ‘can help to reduce the inherent weaknesses of individual methods by offsetting them by the strength of another, thereby maximizing both the internal and external validity of research’ (Dörnyei, 2007, pp. 43–44). References Altarriba, J., & Basnight-Brown, D. M. (2012). The acquisition of concrete, abstract, and emotion words in a second language. International Journal of Bilingualism, 16, 446–452. doi:10.1177/1367006911429511 Ayçiçeği-Dinn, A., Sisman, S., & Caldwell-Harris, C. L. (Forthcoming). Does attending English-language university diminish abilities in the native language? Data from Turkey. Applied Linguistics. Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 13 Aronin, L., & Singleton, D. (2012). Multilingualism. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Baker, C. (2006). Foundations of bilingualism and bilingual education (4th ed.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Baker, C. (2011). Foundations of bilingualism and bilingual education (5th ed.). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Bhatia, T. K. (2006). Introduction. In T. K. Bhatia & W. C. Ritchie (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism (pp. 5–6). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Benet-Martínez, V., Leu, J., Lee, F., & Morris, M. (2002). Negotiating biculturalism: Cultural frame switching in biculturals with oppositional versus compatible cultural identities. Journal of Cross Cultural Psychology, 33(5), 492–516. Bhatia, T. K., & Ritchie, W. C. (2008). The handbook of bilingualism. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Bialystok, E. (1987). Influences of bilingualism on metalinguistic development. Second Language Research, 3, 154–166. Bialystok, E., Luk, G., & Kwan, E. (2005). Bilingualism, biliteracy, and learning to read: Interactions among languages and writing systems. Scientific Studies of Reading, 9(1), 43–61. Blommaert, J., Collins, J., & Slembrouck, S. (2005). Spaces of multilingualism. Language & Communication, 25, 197–216. doi:10.1016/j.langcom.2005.05.002 Butler, Y. G. (2012). Bilingualism/multilingualism and second-language acquisition. In T. K. Bhatia & W. C. Ritchie (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism and multilingualism (pp. 109– 136). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Caldwell-Harris, C. L., & Ayçiçeği-Dinn, A. (2009). Emotion and lying in a non-native language. International Journal of Psychophysiology, 71, 193–204. Caldwell-Harris, C. L., Tong, J., Lung, W., & Poo, S. (2011). Physiological reactivity to emotional phrases in Mandarin–English bilinguals. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15, 329–352. Cenoz, J. (2009). Towards multilingual education: Basque educational research from an international perspective. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Cenoz, J. (2013). Defining multilingualism. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 33, 3–18. Chen, S. H., Kennedy, M., & Zhou, Q. (2012). Parents’ expression and discussion of emotion in the multilingual family does language matter? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 7, 365– 383. doi:10.1177/1745691612447307 Chen, S. X., Benet-Martínez, V., & Bond, M. H. (2008). Bicultural identity, bilingualism, and psychological adjustment in multilingual societies: Immigration-based and globalizationbased acculturation. Journal of Personality, 76(4), 803–837. Clément, R., & Noels, K. A. (1992). Towards a situated approach to ethnolinguistic identity: The effects of status on individuals and groups. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 11, 203–231. Comanaru, R., & Noels, K. A. (2009). Self-determination, motivation, and the learning of Chinese as a heritage language. Canadian Modern Language Review/La Revue Canadienne Des Langues Vivantes, 66, 131–158. doi:10.3138/cmlr.66.1.131 Comanaru, R., & Noels, K. A. (2014). Bicultural identity orientations in first- and second-generation immigrants. Unpublished manuscript. Costa, A., Foucart, A., Hayakawa, S., Aparici, M., Apesteguia, J., Heafner, J., & Keysar, B. (2014). Your morals depend on language. PLoS ONE, 9, e94842. doi:10.1371/journal.pone Cummins, J. (1978). Bilingualism and the development of metalinguistic awareness. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 9(2), 131–149. Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1985). Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior. New York, NY: Plenum. Dewaele, J.-M. (2010). ‘Christ fucking shit merde!’ Language preferences for swearing among maximally proficient multilinguals. Sociolinguistic Studies, 4, 595–614. doi.org/10.1558/sols. v4i3.595 Dewaele, J.-M. (2011). The differences in self-reported use and perception of the L1 and L2 of maximally proficient bi- and multilinguals: A quantitative and qualitative investigation. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 208, 25–51. doi:10.1515/IJSL.2011.011 Dewaele, J.-M. (2012). Personality. Personality traits as independent and dependent variables. In S. Mercer, S. Ryan, & M. Williams (Eds.), Psychology for language learning: Insights from research, theory and practice (pp. 42–58). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 14 R.-S. Comanaru and J.-M. Dewaele Dewaele, J.-M. (2013). Emotions in multiple languages (2nd ed.). Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Dewaele, J.-M., & Furnham, A. (1999). Extraversion: The unloved variable in applied linguistic research. Language Learning, 49, 509–544. doi:10.1111/0023-8333.00098 Dewaele, J.-M., Petrides, K. V., & Furnham, A. (2008). The effects of trait emotional intelligence and sociobiographical variables on communicative anxiety and foreign language anxiety among adult multilinguals: A review and empirical investigation. Language Learning, 58, 911–960. doi:10.1080/00223891.2010.497426 Dewaele, J.-M., & Stavans, A. (2014). The effect of immigration, acculturation and multicompetence on personality profiles of Israeli multilinguals. The International Journal of Bilingualism, 18, 203–221. doi:10.1177/1367006912439941 Dewaele, J.-M., & van Oudenhoven, J. P. (2009). The effect of multilingualism/multiculturalism on personality: No gain without pain for third culture kids? International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(4), 443–459. doi:10.1080/14790710903039906 Dörnyei, Z. (2005). The psychology of the language learner. New York, NY: Routledge. Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Dörnyei, Z. (2009). The L2 motivational self system. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z. (2014). Researching complex dynamic systems: ‘Retrodictive qualitative modelling’ in the language classroom. Language Teaching, 47, 80–91. doi:10.1017/S0261444811000516 Dörnyei, Z., MacIntyre, P. D., & Henry, A. (Eds.). (2014). Motivational dynamics in language learning. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Dörnyei, Z., & Ushioda, E. (2009). Motivation, language identity and the L2 self. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Duñabeitia, J. A., & Costa, A. (2015). Lying in a native foreign language. Psychonomic Bulleting Review, 22(4), 1124–1129. Edwards, J. (2006). Foundations of bilingualism. In T. K. Bhatia & W. C. Ritchie (Eds.), The handbook of bilingualism (pp. 7–31). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons. Eilola, T., & Havelka, J. (2011). Behavioural and physiological responses to the emotional and taboo Stroop tasks in native and non-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15, 353–369. doi:10.1177/1367006910379263 Garcia, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Gass, S. M. (2013). Second language acquisition: An introductory course. London: Routledge. Grosjean, F. (2010). Bilingual: Life and reality. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Hammarberg, B. (2010). The languages of the multilingual: Some conceptual and terminological issues. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 48, 91–104. doi:10.1515/iral.2010.005 Harzing, A. W. (2006). Response styles in cross-national survey research: A 26-country study. International Journal of Cross Cultural Management, 6, 243–266. Hong, Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C., & Benet-Martinez, V. (2000). Multicultural minds: A dynamic constructivist approach to culture and cognition. American Psychologist, 55, 709–720. doi.apa.org/journals/amp/55/7/709 Jessner, U. (2008). Teaching third languages: Findings, trends and challenges. Language Teaching, 41, 15–56. doi:10.1017/S0261444807004739 Joseph, J. E. (2004). Language and identity: National, ethnic, religious. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Kinginger, C. (2008). Language learning in study abroad: Case studies of Americans in France. Oxford: Blackwell. Kramsch, C. (2012). Authenticity and legitimacy in multilingual SLA. Critical Multilingualism Studies, 1, 107–128. Lambert, W. E. (1974). Culture and language as factors in learning and education. In F. E. Aboud, & R. D. Mead (Eds.), Cultural factors in learning and education. Bellingham, WA: Fifth Western Washington Symposium on Learning. Luk, G., Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Grady, C. L. (2011). Lifelong bilingualism maintains white matter integrity in older adults. The Journal of Neuroscience, 31, 16808–16813. doi:10. 1523/JNEUROSCI.4563-11.2011 Noels, K. A. (2014). Language variation and ethnic identity: A social psychological perspective. Language & Communication, 35, 88–96. doi:10.1016/j.langcom.2013.12.001 Downloaded by [University College London] at 08:24 22 August 2015 International Journal of Multilingualism 15 Noels, K. A., Clément, R., & Pelletier, L. G. (1999). Perceptions of teachers’ communicative style and students’ intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. The Modern Language Journal, 83, 23–34. doi:10.1111/0026-7902.00003 Noels, K. A., & Giles, H. (2009). Social identity and language learning. In W. C. Ritchie & T. K. Bhatia (Eds.), The new handbook of second language acquisition (pp. 647–670). Bingley: Emerald. Noels, K. A., Pelletier, L. G., Clément, R., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). Why are you learning a second language? Motivational orientations and self-determination theory. Language Learning, 53, 33–64. doi:10.1111/1467-9922.53223 Norton, B. (1997). Language, identity, and the ownership of English. TESOL Quarterly, 31, 409–429. Norton, B. (2000). Identity and language learning: Gender, ethnicity and educational change. Harlow: Longman/Pearson. Ohinata, A., & van Ours, J. C. (2013). How immigrant children affect the academic achievement of native Dutch children. The Economic Journal, 123, F308–F331. doi:10.1111/ecoj.12052 Pavlenko, A. (2005). Emotions and multilingualism. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press. Pavlenko, A. (2012). Affective processing in bilingual speakers: Disembodied cognition? International Journal of Psychology, 47, 405–428. doi:10.1080/00207594.2012.743665 Stavans, A., & Hofmann, C. (2015). Multilingualism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Tajfel, H. (1974). Social identity and intergroup behavior. Social Science Information, 13, 65–93. Todeva, E., & Cenoz, J. (Eds.). (2009). The multiple realities of multilingualism. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. Ushioda, E. (2009). A person-in-context relational view of emergent motivation, self and identity. In Z. Dornyei & E. Ushioda (Eds.), Motivation, language identity and the L2 self (pp. 9–42). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. Wilson, R., & Dewaele, J.-M. (2010). The use of web questionnaires in second language acquisition and bilingualism research. Second Language Research, 26, 103–123. doi:10.1177/ 0267658309337640 Yip, T. (2005). Sources of situational variation in ethnic identity and psychological well-being: A palm pilot study of Chinese American students. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 31(12), 1603–1616.