Despite a meteoric rise, results in the cognitive science of bilingualism present with significant inconsistency. In parallel, there is a striking absence of an ecologically valid theory within bilingualism research. How should one interpret the totality of available data that can pull in opposing directions? To proceed, we need to identify which practices impede progression. Hitherto, we bring to the fore an undiscussed practice, contextualizing how it impacts the ability to embed the available results into an overarching theory. We suggest that a stacking the deck fallacy - the tendency to engage differently with available evidence, directing focus to specific sub-samples - hampers theory formation. We put forth a proposal for making progress, building on the premise that what is lacking in the field is a unifying perspective that reconciles seemingly contradictory results. We suggest that the necessary shift of perspective towards progress crucially entails linking the notions of spectrum and trade-off.