Examining Neurodiversity in Bilingual Development Research: Recent Insights Through an Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Lens

BackgroundAs highlighted by research on typically developing children, various biases exist when evaluating bilingual children’s abilities (De Houwer, 2023; Grosjean, 1998). These biases can lead to unequitable assessment of language and cognitive abilities – potentially over- or under-estimating bilinguals’ skills. Recent reviews on neurodivergent bilingual children (Kay-Raining Bird et al., 2016; Uljarević et al., 2016) alluded to the possibility that these biases are also present in clinical research.AimsThis review examines bilingual neurodiversity research in children through the lens of equity, diversity, and inclusion. Specifically, it evaluates potential biases in recent studies determine whether linguistic and cognitive abilities are assessed equitably, identify the types of linguistic and neurodiverse experiences represented in research, and examine the roles bilingual individuals play in research.MethodsWe conducted an abbreviated systematic review with a multi-pronged search of databases and a manual search for quantitative studies on linguistic and cognitive abilities with bilingual neurodivergent children. The Joanna Briggs Institute Checklist was adapted for risk of bias assessment. Data was extracted and analyzed from 95 studies, including study methods, bilingualism-related information (e.g., age of acquisition, language history tools, socioeconomic status), outcomes of interest (language, cognition), tasks (e.g., domain, name), and the main results or conclusions of each article.Main ContributionWe found that equitable bilingual assessment of language and cognition was highly affected by the lack of culturally and linguistically appropriate tools. Most studies used case-control designs, contrasting neurodivergent bilinguals with monolingual or typically developing peers, which promotes a deficit-based monolingual centered-view in bilingual neurodiversity research. We also identified persistent challenges in defining and measuring bilingualism that complicates cross-comparison across studies and disorders. Research focus remained largely on developmental language disorder (DLD; n=34) and autism spectrum disorder (ASD; n=29) given its language symptomology, while acquired disorders are understudied. Additionally, there is a lack of community-based research that could offer more inclusive methods by involving bilingual communities throughout the research process.ConclusionsThis review emphasizes the need to adopt equitable and inclusive research practices to better understand and support neurodivergent bilingual children. Future research should embrace a nuanced understanding of bilingualism and neurodiversity, prioritizing inclusive methodologies, as well as holistic assessments using culturally and linguistically appropriate tools, to avoid misdiagnoses and ensure fair clinical evaluations of language and cognition.