Course Overview and Goals
This case study focuses on two teaching modules designed for an upper-division undergraduate psycholinguistics course (LIGN 170: Psycholinguistics) taught by Ebru Evcen in Summer 2024. This course is an elective course with only one prerequisite – LIGN 101: Introduction to the Study of Language. The course was structured to introduce students to the field of psycholinguistics, emphasizing how humans learn, process, and use language in communication. Core topics included language acquisition, word recognition, sentence processing, language production, and the communicative aspect of language. Alongside the theoretical foundations in psycholinguistics, a key focus of the course was the methodical analysis of empirical research papers, particularly through the use of the QALMRI (Questions, Alternatives, Logic, Method, Results, Inferences) method. QALMRI is a method to guide students with the analytical skills necessary to dissect research studies.
Psycholinguistics research has long been influenced by several biases that limit the inclusivity and generalizability of its findings. The goal of the new course modules was to foster awareness of inclusivity and diversity issues within psycholinguistics research. Students were introduced to biases that affect the field, and they were encouraged to approach research with a critical lens that seeks to make psycholinguistic findings more broadly representative and generalizable. These modules specifically focused on two major challenges in the field – WEIRD bias and native speakerism – discussed in more detail below.
The full public course website can be accessed here.
Module Structure
The two new course modules aimed to raise awareness among students about these two significant challenges in psycholinguistics and to explore potential solutions. Through readings, classroom discussions, and activities, students engaged with these issues. The in-class sessions were not isolated activities; rather, they served as part of a scaffolded learning approach, with each discussion helping students develop insights and skills that would be useful for their final projects. This structure enabled students to build on their knowledge, moving from theoretical discussions to the practical application of those ideas in their own research.
For both modules, students followed a similar process: they began by reading assigned papers and then worked in groups during class. Using a Padlet board, they answered guiding prompts and participated in group discussions. The use of interactive Padlet boards provided a collaborative platform where students posted responses, interacted with peers, and used these discussions to inform their final project proposals.
Since these modules were taught in a 5-week summer term, they were each covered in one class session. In a longer academic term, each module could be extended over multiple sessions.
Module: WEIRD Bias
Module Overview
In this module, students examined the implications of WEIRD bias and its impact on the generalizability of research. The vast majority of psycholinguistic research has been conducted on WEIRD populations (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, Democratic). Around 95% of behavioral science research is based on individuals from the US, Europe, and English-speaking countries, who represent only about 12% of the global population (Henrich et al., 2010). The reliance on these populations skews research findings, making them less applicable to non-WEIRD societies. Furthermore, many studies use university students as participants, which introduces additional layers of homogeneity and limits the generalizability of conclusions. In psycholinguistics specifically, research often assumes that the linguistic and cognitive experiences of these populations are universal, when in fact they may be atypical, especially when compared to other linguistic communities around the world.
Student Activities
For this module, students read the following article before class:
WEIRD Psycholinguistics. Bylund, Emmanuel. 2022. In Quentin Williams, Ana Deumert, and Tommaso M. Milani (eds.), Struggles for Multilingualism and Linguistic Citizenship: 183-200. Berlin: De Gruyter.
They were also given additional optional materials (see below) on expanding psycholinguistics research beyond the lab. Key discussion points included:
- The over-reliance on Western, college-educated participants, and the lack of representation from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds.
- How non-English languages are often perceived as “exotic,” contributing to Anglocentric research designs.
- The importance of diversifying research methods, including field studies, global recruitment, and collaboration across linguistic communities.
Students used a Padlet board to collaboratively create a WEIRDness checklist (focusing on participant demographics, research settings and generalizability of findings to non-WEIRD populations). They proposed solutions for making research more inclusive, including diversifying participant pools and conducting studies in different cultural and linguistic contexts.
Refer to this Padlet board for the module that can be copied for prompts and discussion starters.
Further Optional Resources
Studying Psycholinguistics out of the Lab. Speed, Laura J., Ewelina Wnuk, and Asifa Majid. 2018. In Annette M. B. de Groot and Peter Hagoort (eds.), Research Methods in Psycholinguistics and the Neurobiology of Language: A Practical Guide: 190-207. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
- This paper proposes three practical solutions to broaden the scope of psycholinguistic research beyond WEIRD populations.
Over-reliance on English hinders cognitive science. Blasi, Damián E., Joseph Henrich, Evangelia Adamou, David Kemmerer, Asifa Majid. 2022. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 26(12):1153-1170.
- Highlighting case studies, the paper addresses significant limitations in cognitive sciences caused by the predominant use of English, which introduces biases that influence research outcomes and generalizations about human cognition.
Module: Redefining the Term “Native Speaker”
Module Overview
This module focused on the problematic use of the term “native speaker” in psycholinguistics. This term often carries implicit assumptions about linguistic purity and proficiency, ignoring the diverse linguistic backgrounds and identities of individuals. This vague usage can be hurtful, particularly when it leads to exclusion or oversimplification of participants’ experiences. Many studies define “native speakers” in a way that overlooks multilingualism, language identity, and cultural immersion.
Student Activities
For this module, students read the following article before class:
The problematic concept of native speaker in psycholinguistics: Replacing vague and harmful terminology with inclusive and accurate measures. Cheng, Lauretta S. P., Danielle Burgess, Natasha Vernooij, Cecilia Solís-Barroso, Ashley McDermott, & Savithry Namboodiripad. 2021. Frontiers in Psychology 12:715843.
Students then discussed their own language background and identity, reflecting on how the term “native speaker” applies to their identities and how it should be redefined in research contexts.
Through group discussions and reading materials, students discussed alternative definitions of “native speaker” that account for factors such as age and order of language acquisition, context of acquisition, proficiency and usage, language identity and allegiance. Students then used a Padlet board to create their own “native speaker” recruitment criteria based on their group discussions, aiming for more inclusive and representative samples.
Refer to this Padlet board for the module that can be copied for prompts and discussion starters.
Assessment: Final Project – QALMRI+++
For the final project for the course, students applied the QALMRI method to a research paper (they had practiced this method throughout the quarter). They were also asked to build on what they had learned through the two new modules to incorporate an evaluation of bias and suggestions for changing study design to address these issues. The structure for the comprehensive final report included:
- QALMRI Report: A structured analysis of an empirical paper, evaluating its research question, methodology, results, and implications.
- WEIRDness Evaluation: A detailed assessment of the WEIRDness of the original study, with justifications for the rating and suggestions for improvement.
- Follow-Up Study Proposal: A proposal for a new study that addresses potential limitations of the original study or explores new questions that arise from its findings.
- Redefining Participant Profile: A redefinition of participant recruitment criteria, focusing on how “native speakers” are defined and how more diverse linguistic profiles can be included.
More detailed instructions and sample grading rubrics can be found here.
The instructor would like to thank Emily Clem and Shai Nielson for their contributions to the development of this project, and to the students of LIGN 170 in Summer 2024 for their engagement and contributions.