Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2015 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: Biling (Camb Engl). 2014 Jul;17(3):610–629. doi: 10.1017/S1366728913000564

Table 2.

Stimulus–Response Conflict: Simon Task. Overview of studies where (A) no bilingual Simon advantage was identified, where (B) a bilingual Simon inhibition advantage was identified, or (C) where a bilingual overall speed advantage was identified on the Simon task. When only specific groups or experiments show an effect, they are listed next to the relevant check mark.

Study A. No bilingual advantages B. Bilingual inhibition advantages C. Bilingual speed advantages

1. Bialystok, 2006
(n = 97, 22yo)
2. Bialystok, Craik, Grady et al., 2005
(n = 29, 29yo, 10 French–English bilinguals, 9 Cantonese–English bilinguals)
√French–English bilinguals √Cantonese–English bilinguals
3. Bialystok et al., 2004
(Expt 1: n = 40, 43yo, 71.9yo; Expt 2: n = 94, 42.6yo, 70.3yo)
4. Bialystok, Martin & Viswanathan, 2005
(Expt 1: n = 34, children; Expt 2: n = 40, children; Expt 3: n = 96, 20–30yo; Expt 4: n = 40, 30–59yo, 60–80yo; Expt 5: n = 94, 30–59yo, 60–80yo)
√Expt 3 √Expt 1, 2, 4, 5
5. Martin-Rhee & Bialystok, 2008
(Expt 1: n = 34, 4.8yo; Expt 2: n = 41, 4.5yo)
6. Morton & Harper, 2007
(n = 34, 6.9yo)
7. Salvatierra & Rosselli, 2011
(n = 233, 26.8yo, 64.1yo)
√26.8yo √64.1yo
8. Schroeder & Marian, 2012
(n = 36, 80.8yo)

yo = years old