Control Stimuli in Experimental Code-Switching Research

Abstract

The current study investigates whether there is variation among different types of control stimuli in code-switching (CS) research, how such stimuli can be used to accommodate heterogeneity, and how they can also be used as a baseline comparison of acceptability. A group of native Spanish–English bilinguals (n = 20) completed a written acceptability judgment task with a 7-point Likert scale. Five different types of control stimuli were included, with three types considered to be completely acceptable (complex-sentence switches, direct-object switches, and subject–predicate switches) and two types considered to be completely unacceptable (pronoun switches and present–perfect switches). Additionally, a set of present–progressive switches were included as a comparison, as their acceptability status is still actively debated. The participants as a whole exhibited the expected grammatical distinctions among the control stimuli, but with a high degree of individual variability. Pronoun switches and auxiliary verb switches were rated significantly lower than the complex-sentence switches, direct-object switches, and subject–predicate switches. These results show that control stimuli can also establish a baseline comparison of acceptability, and recommendations for inclusion in experimental CS research are provided.

Adverbs in Spanish–English code-switching: Comparing verb raising and non-raising

“…However, recall that the task included control stimuli that were completely unrelated to the adverb data (e.g., pronoun switches, complex-sentence switches). The judgments provided by the participants for these structures are directly in line with other Spanish–English CS data regarding such structures (Koronkiewicz, 2019), suggesting that the participants here were indeed completing the task appropriately and providing reliable results.…”

“…There was also a number of filler stimuli for the CS block ( n = 89), the Spanish block ( n = 38), and the English block ( n = 42). Following Koronkiewicz (2019), the AJT contained control stimuli, including acceptable clausal switches (13a), as well as unacceptable present perfect auxiliary switches and subject pronoun switches (13c) (and their monolingual equivalents). The remaining filler stimuli included different variations of preposition stranding (13d).…”

The effect of lexical triggers on Spanish-English code-switched judgment tasks

“…In particular, it continues the conversation initiated by González-Vilbazo et al ( 2013 ), examining the best practices in CS research that uses experimental judgment data. Since then, several different specific works have continued this thread, including studies on a wide array of issues as they relate to CS, such as stimuli modality (Koronkiewicz and Ebert, 2018 ), CS attitudes' effect on judgment ratings (Badiola et al, 2018 ), the use of control stimuli (Koronkiewicz, 2019 ), and the value of monolingual stimuli in CS experiments (Ebert and Koronkiewicz, 2018 ).…”