Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives

Accepted manuscript, to appeared in Applied Psycholinguistics: https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/applied-psycholinguistics.Herein, we contextualize, problematize and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho)linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity and equity in our field

Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives

Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field

Monolingual comparative normativity in bilingualism research is out of “control”: Arguments and alternatives

Herein, we contextualize, problematize, and offer some insights for moving beyond the problem of monolingual comparative normativity in (psycho) linguistic research on bilingualism. We argue that, in the vast majority of cases, juxtaposing (functional) monolinguals to bilinguals fails to offer what the comparison is supposedly intended to do: meet the standards of empirical control in line with the scientific method. Instead, the default nature of monolingual comparative normativity has historically contributed to inequalities in many facets of bilingualism research and continues to impede progress on multiple levels. Beyond framing our views on the matter, we offer some epistemological considerations and methodological alternatives to this standard practice that improve empirical rigor while fostering increased diversity, inclusivity, and equity in our field.publishedVersio

Protein Architecture of the Human Kinetochore Microtubule Attachment Site

Centromeric chromatin – spindle microtubule interactions mediated by kinetochores drive chromosome segregation. We have developed a two-color fluorescence light microscopy method that measures average label separation, Delta, at < 5 nm accuracy — to elucidate the protein architecture of human metaphase kinetochores. Delta analysis, when correlated with tension states of spindle-attached sister kinetochore pairs, provided information on mechanical properties of protein linkages within kinetochores. Treatment with taxol—which suppresses microtubule dynamics, eliminates tension at kinetochores, and activates the spindle checkpoint—resulted in specific large-scale changes in kinetochore architecture. Cumulatively, Delta analysis revealed compliant linkages close to the centromeric chromatin, suggests a model for how the KMN (KNL1/Mis12 complex/Ndc80 complex) network provides microtubule attachment and generates pulling forces from depolymerization, and reveals architectural changes induced by taxol treatment. The methods described here should also be applicable to other intermediate-scale biological machines in cells

What do people with MS want and expect from health-care services?

Objective To determine the health‐care preferences of people with Multiple Sclerosis (MS). Design Cross‐sectional survey using a postal questionnaire comprising standardized measures of health related quality of life (SF‐36) and of depression (BDI) and original questions about issues linked to health‐care, prioritized by people with MS during an earlier qualitative phase. Participants A stratified sample of 318 people with MS in Scotland and England. Results Questionnaires were sent to 471 people with multiple sclerosis. The 318 respondents (68%) reported a wide variation in quality of life, but on average scored significantly lower than normative values in all dimensions of the SF‐36. The most commonly used home treatment during the previous year was evening primrose oil, taken by almost half of the sample (47%). Use of cannabis was acknowledged by 8%. There was evidence that many preferences concerning health services were not satisfied. For instance lack of advice about at least one MS related issue was reported lacking for three‐quarters of the sample and 17% lacked advice in at least five areas. Advice about exercise was the single most requested area. The most frequently consulted health professional was the GP (78%) followed by the hospital consultant (50%). The professional that respondents most commonly said they would like to have seen was a specialist MS nurse (30%). Forty‐three percent of the sample said they had attended a special meeting for people with MS or disabilities. They were equally divided between those who did and who did not find their last attendance helpful. Conclusions People with MS display a wide variation in their preference for services and unmet needs. Information about management (both conventional and unconventional), relevant tailored advice and access to appropriately skilled professionals should be feasible components of high quality care. This work has highlighted the value of involving people with MS in the identification of their preferences; further research is needed to show how these might be provided most effectively