Searching for the “native” speaker: A preregistered conceptual replication and extension of Reid, Trofimovich, and O’Brien (2019)

Abstract

This study conceptually replicated and extended Reid, Trofimovich, and O’Brien (2019), who found that native English speakers could be biased positively (or negatively) relative to a control condition in terms of how they rate non-native English speech. Our internet-based study failed to replicate Reid et al. across a wider population sample of “native” speakers (n = 189). Listeners did not change how they rated non-native English speech after social bias orientations and performed similarly across all five measures of speech and across age and race (Asian, Black, and Caucasian). We attribute our results to differences in the methods (in-person vs. online) and/or participants. Of note, roughly one-third of our “native” participants indicated proficiency in languages other than English and residency in 12 different English-speaking countries, despite identifying as a) fluent English speakers who b) used English primarily and c) acquired English before any other language from birth. These screening items taken together qualified “native” participants in line with traditional psycholinguistics research. We conclude that the concept of “nativeness” is tied to culture-specific perspectives surrounding language use. As such, the native/non-native categorical variable simultaneously serves and limits the advancement of psycholinguistics research.

Essentialist characterizations of language are an obstacle to accuracy, progress, and justice in science

“…Second, by over-generalizing such categories, we inadvertently homogenize the rich diversity within groups, potentially exaggerating differences across groups, and unintentionallyand falselyconstructing linguistic practices and knowledge as static and uniform entities 12,[33][34][35][36][37][38] . Thirdly, relying on these labels in language background surveys and recruitment materials falsely assumes that participants and researchers have a shared understanding of what it means to be a NATIVE SPEAKER/SIGNER, demonstrating that this construct fails very basic tests of validity 39 .…”

Trilingual and Multicultural Experiences Mitigating Students’ Linguistic Stereotypes: Investigating the Perceptions of Undergraduates of Chinese Heritage Regarding Native/Non-Native English Teachers

“…Cheng et al (2021) argue that the term NS is not valid for the construction of rigorous theories, and is harmful to marginalized populations by reproducing normative assumptions about behavior, experience, and identity [46]. It often omits important details and diversity that researchers need to consider [47]. Also, such a distinction may wrongly presuppose that an NS is a successful speaker while an NNS is less successful in language acquisition, disregarding their needs and abilities [48], while in reality not all native speakers are good English speakers [49].…”