Objective measures, especially the MINT Sprint 2.0, provided thestrongest single predictors of language dominance and Englishproficiency, while self-report measures were weaker and contrib-uted little or no predictive power in combined models.

The results of this study demonstrated overall superiority of objectiveover self-report measures. The MINT Sprint 2.0 picture naming testwas the single most strongly correlated measure with OPI scores,especially for measuring dominance and balance (confidence inter-vals hardly overlapped with the single most strongly correlated self-report measure).

The best predictor of OPI dominance scores was the MINT Sprint2.0 dominance score followed by the Spanish H-LDT score, Span-ish category fluency score and least predicted by the letter fluencydominance score

We next ran linear models 1 using forward selection. Forwardselection compared a base model with a full model to select whichpredictors explained a significant amount of variance in thedependent OPI score.

We then ran correlations between the OPI scores from fourcategories (dominance, balance, Spanish and English) and all scoresacross these categories for all the other measures (see Table 2). Forthe MINT Sprint 2.0, we examined correlations between OPI scoresand four MINT Sprint 2.0 sub-measures: first pass accuracy, totalscore accuracy (first plus second pass accuracy), measure of percentresolved pictures in the second pass out of pictures not named in thefirst pass and a first pass efficiency scores (time spent naming inminutes divided by proportion correct answers; Bruyer & Brys-baert, 2011). The first pass and total scores were the most robustlycorrelated with OPI scores

Objective proficiency measures included, besides the OPI, anddescribed in detail the following: (a) a fast administration versionof the MINT, that is, the MINT Sprint 2.0 (Gollan et al., 2023), (b) acategory fluency task, (c) a letter fluency task and (d) a lexicaldecision task (LDT)

We recruited80 Spanish–English bilinguals from the undergraduate populationat the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). All participantswere tested via Zoom. Most undergraduates at UCSD learnedSpanish at birth but are English-dominant. To ensure we had atleast some representation in our dataset of different languagedominance profiles,

The OPI can be considered a gold standard because it has highface validity and is easily adapted for administration in manydifferent languages. However, even though the OPI is arguablythe best way to measure proficiency and degree of bilingualismaccurately, it is rarely feasible to administer in research or clinicalsettings due to time constraints and lack of individuals qualifiedto administer and score an OPI in both languages for bilinguals.This study was designed to determine which brief objectivemeasure(s) of proficiency, already widely used in research andin clinical settings, best predict(s) the gold standard.

which can vary from 5- to10-point Likert scales, where 1 usually represents lowest skill and 5, 7 or 10 represent highest skill(Li et al., 2006). While these scales can quickly and easily provide some estimate of proficiencylevel, they can also create significant misconceptions. One major obstacle to their validity is theirsubjectivity: bilinguals report how they think they should perform instead of how they performobjectively

Currently, many researchers rely on self-ratings of proficiency,

Bilingualism can be defined in terms of proficiency, dominance and balance. Proficiencycorresponds to how quickly, accurately and easily a person can retrieve words and other linguisticstructures and the facility of language use across various communicative contexts (Hulstijn,2011). Proficiency spans four modalities: speaking, understanding, reading and writing. Dom-inance corresponds to which language is more proficient, and balance refers to relative profi-ciency in the two languages. This can vary with domain or context and can change over abilingual’s lifetime, depending on their experiences (Birdsong, 2014; Treffers-Daller & Silva-Corvalan, 2016). Among key variables that influence dominance are age of acquisition

We investigated which objective language proficiency tests best predict the language dominance,balance, English and Spanish proficiency scores relative to Oral Proficiency Interview (OPI)scores (averaged across 5–6 raters). Eighty Spanish–English bilinguals completed OPIs, picturenaming, semantic and letter fluency, lexical decision tests and a language history questionnaire.Except for letter fluency, objective measures explained more variance than self-report variables,which seldom and negligibly improved proficiency prediction beyond objective measures inforward regression models. Picture naming (the Multilingual Naming Test (MINT) Sprint 2.0)was the strongest predictor for most purposes.