Parent Ratings of Executive Function and Functional Communication in Children with ASD Exposed to One or Multiple Languages

Background: Although exposure to a second language may have benefits for typically developing (TD) children, particularly in executive functioning (EF) (Bialystok, 2007), in children with ASD, the effects of exposure to a second language (L2) on EF and functional communication is unknown. Families and educators have relied on anecdotal evidence to make decisions about language learning, in some cases, limiting exposure to the language of education (typically English) despite lack of empirical evidence (Paradis, 2007). However, some parents have reported exposing their children with ASD to multiple languages and considered them able to achieve bilingualism (Bird, Lamond, & Holden, 2012). Bilingual children with ASD were found to be as proficient in English language production and vocabulary compared to monolingual children with ASD (Petersen, Marinova-Todd, & Mirenda, 2012).

Objectives: The aim of our study was to compare parent rated functional communication (FC) and executive function (EF) in youth 6-18 years with and without ASD exposed to a second language (L2) or only one language, as reported by their parents. Specifically, we wanted to examine whether any EF benefits from L2 exposure were apparent in children with ASD, as well as whether parent’s ratings of FC differed across groups.

Methods: One-hundred and seventy-four youth between the ages of 6 -18 years (M= 12.04 years) were matched on age, IQ (WASI-II), maternal education, and were divided into four groups: ASD-L2 Exposure, TD-L2 Exposure, ASD-No L2 Exposure, and TD-No L2 Exposure. Each caregiver completed a demographic questionnaire and the BASC-2 rating forms that include EF and FC indices.

Results: An analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted between groups and the results indicated that although there was a significant difference in EF and FC in children with and without ASD, the children with ASD exposed to a second language were not significantly different from those with ASD who were exposed to only one language. Thus, second language exposure in the children with ASD was not associated with delay in EF and functional communication skills, rather, there was evidence of a reduced clinical impact in those with a second language exposure as indexed by a lower percentage of children whose FC and EF ratings fell within the clinical range.

Conclusions: The findings are consistent with previous evidence that exposure to a second language is not associated with an adverse impact on the communication and cognitive skills of children with ASD. Future research on clinical/functional rather than simply statistical differences between groups is needed to further elaborate on the potential benefits to EF in children with ASD exposed to a second language. Observational and qualitative methods may be particularly helpful in identifying any differences in language environments and EF and communication performance.