Table 1. Study categorization criteria, examples, and descriptive statistics for each paper category regarding the percentage of behavioral information supporting the BA.
| Category | Percentages | Example 1 | Example 2 | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| %Sup | Mean (SD) | nSup | nCha | %Sup | nSup | nCha | %Sup | |
| SBA | ≥ 80 | 98.14 (5.88) | 3 | 0 | 100 | 5 | 1 | 83 |
| ABA | 21–79 | 50.9 (12.91) | 2 | 2 | 50 | 2 | 4 | 33 |
| NMA | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | - |
| CBA | ≤ 20 | 1.96 (5.88) | 0 | 3 | 0 | 1 | 6 | 14 |
SBA: supports the bilingual advantage; ABA: ambiguous about the bilingual advantage; NMA: does not mention the bilingual advantage; CBA: challenges the bilingual advantage; %Sup: percentage of behavioral information supporting the BA in the abstract; nSup: number of behavioral results supporting the BA in the abstract; nCha: number of behavioral results challenging the BA in the abstract (reversed or null results); SD: standard deviation.