Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-d8cs5 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-02-11T03:34:18.017Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ON THE RELIABILITY OF ROBUSTNESS

A Reply to DeKeyser

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 July 2002

Ellen Bialystok
Ellen Bialystok
Affiliation:
York University Address correspondence to: Ellen Bialystok, Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario M3J 1P3, Canada; e-mail: ellenb@yorku.ca.
Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

DeKeyser (2000) reports a study in which he examines three hypotheses concerning the existence of a critical period for second language acquisition. He concludes that his data support all three predictions and that the notion of a critical period is the best account of the data. However, there are problems in both his interpretation of the data and the issues raised in his discussion that undermine that conclusion. The present paper examines the evidence for the three hypotheses proposed by DeKeyser and argues that the data do not provide the necessary support for the interpretation that a critical period has influenced the results.

Type
Research Article
Information
Studies in Second Language Acquisition , Volume 24 , Issue 3 , September 2002 , pp. 481 - 488
Copyright
2002 Cambridge University Press