1. The Effect of Bilingualism on Text Messaging Efficiency Sandra Yvette Benitez California State University, Dominguez Hills

2. Code Switching Code switch: The alternation of two or more language dialects. Code switch: The alternation of two or more language dialects. Example: Example: “I don’t want to go si tu no puedes ir” “I don’t want to go si tu no puedes ir” “I don’t want to go if you can’t go” “I don’t want to go if you can’t go”

3. Text Messages Short Message Service (SMS), asynchronous communication Short Message Service (SMS), asynchronous communication Individuals are limited to 160 characters per message. Individuals are limited to 160 characters per message. Textisms Textisms Language Abbreviations Language Abbreviations Emoticons Emoticons Capitalization Capitalization Punctuation Punctuation

4. Background Previous research has named common factors that affect an individual’s reasoning for code switching. Previous research has named common factors that affect an individual’s reasoning for code switching.

5. Background Cont. These Include: Environmental settings Environmental settings Your audience Your audience Conversations with embarrassing or uncomfortable topics Conversations with embarrassing or uncomfortable topics Picking up “cues” from others that serve as an invitation to speak both languages Picking up “cues” from others that serve as an invitation to speak both languages

6. Background Cont. Deficiency-Driven Code switching Deficiency-Driven Code switching Proficiency-Driven Code switching Proficiency-Driven Code switching Limited research available relating code switching to communication efficiency. Limited research available relating code switching to communication efficiency.

7. Background Cont. Bautista (2004) Bautista (2004) “ Communicative Efficiency” “ Communicative Efficiency” Friend’s Text : “Don’t get kidnapped.” Friend’s Text : “Don’t get kidnapped.” (Tagalog alternative is: Huwag kang magpapakidnap.) (Tagalog alternative is: Huwag kang magpapakidnap.) Bautista’s Response : “ Walang magra-ransom.” Bautista’s Response : “ Walang magra-ransom.” (The alternative in English is: No one will pay ransom [for me] ) (The alternative in English is: No one will pay ransom [for me] )

8. Purpose This study is testing Bautista’s hypothesis in an experiment comparing a bilingual group of English and Spanish speakers and a monolingual group of English only speakers. This study is testing Bautista’s hypothesis in an experiment comparing a bilingual group of English and Spanish speakers and a monolingual group of English only speakers.

9. Participants N= 38 pairs N= 38 pairs Monolingual = 22 pairs Monolingual = 22 pairs Bilingual =16 pairs Bilingual =16 pairs Participants were undergraduate students recruited from the psychology subject pool at California State University, Dominguez Hills. Participants were undergraduate students recruited from the psychology subject pool at California State University, Dominguez Hills.

10. Texting Game Participants were asked to play a “Password” like game in which the objective was to make their partner guess as many words off of a word list by providing them with descriptions of the word. Participants were asked to play a “Password” like game in which the objective was to make their partner guess as many words off of a word list by providing them with descriptions of the word. Participants were asked to complete this task communicating only via the text messaging service on their cell phones. Participants were asked to complete this task communicating only via the text messaging service on their cell phones.

12. Example of Word Lists English Category: Having Sex Category: Having Sex Masturbation Masturbation Oral Sex Oral Sex Condom Condom Vagina Vagina Breast Breast Penis Penis Orgasm Orgasm Testicles Testicles Sperm Sperm Erection ErectionSpanish Category: Having Sex Category: Having Sex Masturbacion Masturbacion Oral Sex Oral Sex Condon Condon Vagina Vagina Pecho Pecho Penis Penis Orgasmo Orgasmo Testicles Testicles Esperma Esperma Erection Erection

13. Texting Game IV IV Language type: Monolingual vs. Bilingual group. Language type: Monolingual vs. Bilingual group. DV DV The number of words guessed correctly The number of words guessed correctly Character count per message in order to determine which group was most efficient Character count per message in order to determine which group was most efficient The message count per target word per game The message count per target word per game

14. Hypotheses H1: Bilinguals will guess more words correctly than the monolinguals because they will be able to text more efficiently due to the availability of two languages. H1: Bilinguals will guess more words correctly than the monolinguals because they will be able to text more efficiently due to the availability of two languages. H2: Bilinguals will use fewer characters within their text messages because they will be able to choose the shortest words from both languages. H2: Bilinguals will use fewer characters within their text messages because they will be able to choose the shortest words from both languages. H3: Bilinguals will send fewer messages and guess more words correctly than the monolingual pairs because they will be able to text more efficiently and choose the shortest words due to the availability of two languages. H3: Bilinguals will send fewer messages and guess more words correctly than the monolingual pairs because they will be able to text more efficiently and choose the shortest words due to the availability of two languages.

15. Method Requirements: Requirements: Sign up in pairs according to language capabilities Sign up in pairs according to language capabilities Bring and use their own cell phones Bring and use their own cell phones Text Messaging experience of more than a year. Text Messaging experience of more than a year. Procedure: Procedure: Each pair was distributed the texting game packet Each pair was distributed the texting game packet

16. Method Cont. Participants were then separated into two different rooms. Participants were then separated into two different rooms. Official word lists were distributed. When the 10 min time limit expired, the pairs rotated. Official word lists were distributed. When the 10 min time limit expired, the pairs rotated. Text messages were collected. Text messages were collected.

17. Examples of Code Switches Examples of Code Switches “Buen trabajo mija…next..”. “Buen trabajo mija…next..”. “..” “Good job girl..next..” “Te sale de atras n don’t smell so good” “Te sale de atras n don’t smell so good” “ ” “It comes out through the back and dont smell so good” La mama le da leche al bebe con el q? La mama le da leche al bebe con el q? “ ” “The mother gives milk to the baby with what?”

18. Code Switches # Of Bilingual Pairs # Of Switches Per Pair

19. Hypothesis #1: Hypothesis #1: Number Of Words Correct By Language Group [SD=2.06] [SD=1.86] Monolingual vs. Bilingual t(33)= 1.48, p=0.15 Mean # of Words Guessed Correctly Language Condition M=4.7 M=3.7

20. Hypothesis #2: Hypothesis #2: Characters Per Message By Language Group [SD=6.87] [SD=8.92] Mean # of Characters Per Message Sent Language Condition Monolingual vs Bilingual t(33)= -.129, p=.898 M=27.3M=27.7

21. : Hypothesis #3: Messages Per Target Word By Language Group [SD=2.7] [SD=3.2] Mean # of Messages Sent to achieve target word Language Condition Monolinguals vs. Bilinguals t(33)=-0.56, p=0.58 M=3.8 M=4.4

22. Correlations with Switch Count r Kendall’s Tau Switch Count Words guessed correctly -0.34†p=.098-0.31†p=.062 Character Count Per Message0.24p=.183.081p=.34 Message Count Per Target Word -0.40p=.218-.30P=.210 ( all are 1 tailed tests) † p<.10

23. Results There was no statistical significance when comparing the bilingual vs. monolingual groups in each of the dependent variables. There was no statistical significance when comparing the bilingual vs. monolingual groups in each of the dependent variables.

24. Discussion Bilinguals did not show greater efficiency over the Monolingual pairs. Bilinguals did not show greater efficiency over the Monolingual pairs. Did not support Bautista’s hypothesis Did not support Bautista’s hypothesis Bilingual’s are code switching, however, it has not been directly related to communication efficiency. Bilingual’s are code switching, however, it has not been directly related to communication efficiency.

25. Discussion Cont. First experimental study conducted to try and test this hypothesis. First experimental study conducted to try and test this hypothesis. Bilinguals were shortening both English & Spanish words. Bilinguals were shortening both English & Spanish words.

26. Future Studies Analyzing the underlying mental structures of bilinguals by studying natural occurring text messages. Analyzing the underlying mental structures of bilinguals by studying natural occurring text messages. Elimination of experimental setting that can help capture the code switches in their natural settings. Elimination of experimental setting that can help capture the code switches in their natural settings.

27. Broader Implications Texting as a way of communicating with outpatient clients after treatment. Texting as a way of communicating with outpatient clients after treatment. Our study helped to show that this will be less effective due to the limitations of text messaging. Our study helped to show that this will be less effective due to the limitations of text messaging.

28. Thank you