This experiment examined how university students at a Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI) responded to the use of “Spanglish,” or English-Spanish code-mixing, in written materials promoting university services. Consistent with predictions, the use of Spanglish reduced students’ processing fluency; contrary to predictions, the use of Spanglish did not prompt higher perceptions of inclusiveness or feeling welcome (relative to English-only texts) for students, although both outcomes were higher for Spanglish with glosses (i.e., English translations) compared to Spanglish without glosses.
AlterA. L.OppenheimerD. M. (2009). Uniting the tribes of fluency to form a metacognitive nation. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 13(3), 219–235. https://doi.org/10.1177/1088868309341564
AshikaliT.GroeneveldS. (2015). Diversity management in public organizations and its effect on employees’ affective commitment: The role of transformational leadership and the inclusiveness of the organizational culture. Review of Public Personnel Administration, 35(2), 146–168. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734371X13511088
4.
BullockO. M.Colón AmillD.ShulmanH. C.DixonG. N. (2019). Jargon as a barrier to effective science communication: Evidence from metacognition. Public Understanding of Science, 28(7), 845–853. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F0963662519865687
DragojevicM. (2020). Extending the fluency principle: Factors that increase listeners’ processing fluency positively bias their language attitudes. Communication Monographs, 87(2), 158–178. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2019.1663543
7.
DragojevicM.GilesH. (2016). I don’t like you because you’re hard to understand: The role of processing fluency in the language attitudes process. Human Communication Research, 42(3), 396–420. https://doi.org/10.1111/hcre.12079
8.
DragojevicM.GilesH.BeckA.-C.TatumN. T. (2017). The fluency principle: Why foreign accent strength negatively biases language attitudes. Communication Monographs, 84(3), 385–405. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2017.1322213
9.
DragojevicM.Goatley-SoanS. (2022). Americans’ attitudes toward foreign accents: Evaluative hierarchies and underlying processes. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 43(2), 167–181. https://doi.org/10.1080/01434632.2020.1735402
10.
FarmerT. A.BrownM.TannenhausM. K. (2013). Prediction, explanation and the role of generative models in language processing. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(3), 211–212. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12002312
GasiorekJ.DragojevicM. (2023). Effects of written code-mixing on processing fluency and perceptions of organizational inclusiveness. Communication Monographs, 90(3), 393–413. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2023.2202749
13.
GasiorekJ.DragojevicM. (2024). Code-mixing in promotional materials for tourism: Effects of format on processing fluency and interest in tourism activities. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 43(4), 450–467. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X231210329
GilesH.BourhisR.TaylorD. (1977). Towards a theory of language in ethnic group relations. In GilesH. (Ed.), Language, ethnicity and intergroup relations (pp. 307–348). Academic Press.
16.
GilesH.WatsonB. (2013). The social meanings of language, dialect and accent: International perspectives on speech styles. Peter Lang.
17.
HayesA. F. (2018). Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis: A regression-based approach (2nd ed.). Guilford Press.
18.
HollidayN. R.SquiresL. (2020). Sociolinguistic labor, linguistic climate, and race(ism) on campus: Black college students’ experiences with language at predominantly white institutions. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 25, 418–437. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12438
19.
Lippi-GreenR. (2012). English with an accent: Language, ideology, and discrimination in the United States (2nd ed.). Routledge.
20.
MahootianS. (2006). Code-switching and mixing. In BrownK. (Ed.), Encyclopedia of language and linguistics (pp. 511–527). Elsevier.
21.
NembhardI. M.EdmondsonA. C. (2006). Making it safe: The effects of leader inclusiveness and professional status on psychological safety and improvement efforts in health care teams. Journal of Organizational Behavior, 27(7), 941–966. https://doi.org/10.1002/job.413
22.
PickeringM. J.GarrodS. (2013). An integrated theory of language production and comprehension. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 36(4), 329–347. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X12001495
RakićT.SteffensM. C.MummendeyA. (2011). Blinded by the accent! The minor role of looks in ethnic categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100(1), 16–29. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021522
RyanE. B.CarranzaM. A. (1975). Evaluative reactions of adolescents toward speakers of standard English and Mexican American accented English. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(5), 855–863. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076704
27.
ShulmanH. C.BullockO. M. (2019). Using metacognitive cues to amplify message content: A new direction in strategic communication. Annals of the International Communication Association, 43(1), 24–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/23808985.2019.1570472
28.
TurnerT. A.ZerqueraD. D.TurnerC. S.SáenzV. B. (2017). Answering the call: Hispanic-serving institutions as leaders in the quest for access, excellence, and equity in American higher education. Association of Mexican American Educators Journal, 11(3), 6–28. https://doi.org/10.24974/amae.11.3.359
29.
U.S. Department of Education. (2016). Advancing diversity and inclusion in higher education: Key data highlights focusing on race and ethnicity and promising practices. Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, Office of the Under Secretary. https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/research/pubs/advancing-diversity-inclusion.pdf
