No full-text available
To read the full-text of this research,
you can request a copy directly from the authors.
A new look at “the hard problem” of bilingual lexical access: evidence for language-switch costs with univalent stimuli
Abstract
Considerable work has used language-switching tasks to investigate how bilinguals manage competition between languages. Language-switching costs have been argued to reflect persisting inhibition or persisting activation of a non-target language. However, these costs might instead reflect the use of bivalent stimuli (i.e. pictures or digits that can be responded to in either language). That is, language-switching costs may simply reflect a cost of selecting the task-appropriate response for a given item and so may not be reflective of bilingual lexical access [Finkbeiner, M., Almeida, J., Janssen, N., & Carramaza, A. (2006). Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1075–1089]. The present study addresses this concern by having Chinese/English bilinguals switch between languages in response to inherently univalent stimuli (English words and Chinese Characters) as well as lexically univalent, but orthographically bivalent, stimuli (English words and Chinese Pinyin). Speakers showed switch costs when naming both univalent and orthographically bivalent stimuli, showing that switch costs can be found even with inherently univalent stimuli.
... Evidence from objective cognitive testing is mixed. While some studies concluded that bilingualism seems to improve certain aspects of executive control (Nielsen et al., 2019) and language processing (Bialystok, 1999(Bialystok, , 2011Ordin et al., 2020), others found evidence to the contrary (Lehtonen et al., 2018;Slevc et al., 2016). One hypothesized mechanism to the bilingual advantage is that since bilinguals need to constantly monitor their language use in order to communicate effectively in a given context, their general executive control system is recruited more frequently compared to monolinguals (Bialystok, 2011). ...
... In contrast, other investigators proposed that bilinguals may have a disadvantage on tasks involving high verbal mediation (Savoie et al., 2019;Slevc et al., 2016) due to language-switch costs or increased processing demands. However, other studies failed to replicate these findings (Declerck et al., 2019), arguing for bilingualism being orthogonal to cognitive functioning. ...
... Given the underperformance of AR compared to EN across tests and contrasts in this and previous studies Coffey et al., 2005;Gasquoine et al., 2007;), LEP may be associated with a global deficit in the efficiency of information processing. Increased processing demands due to LEP status (Lehtonen et al., 2018;Savoie et al., 2019;Slevc et al., 2016) may account for this pattern of test scores. Alternative explanations include limited familiarity with certain culture-specific objects or constructs (such as the item content of BNT-15 and TOMM-1) due to lack of early exposure to an Englishspeaking culture or, in a broader sense, weaker social conditioning around the importance of paper-and-pencil testing administered under a time pressure. ...
This study was designed to replicate earlier reports of the utility of the Boston Naming Test-Short Form (BNT-15) as an index of limited English proficiency (LEP). Twenty-eight English-Arabic bilingual student volunteers were administered the BNT-15 as part of a brief battery of cognitive tests. The majority (23) were women, and half had LEP. Mean age was 21.1 years. The BNT-15 was an excellent psychometric marker of LEP status (area under the curve: .990-.995). Participants with LEP underperformed on several cognitive measures (verbal comprehension, visuomotor processing speed, single word reading, and performance validity tests). Although no participant with LEP failed the accuracy cutoff on the Word Choice Test, 35.7% of them failed the time cutoff. Overall, LEP was associated with an increased risk of failing performance validity tests. Previously published BNT-15 validity cutoffs had unacceptably low specificity (.33-.52) among participants with LEP. The BNT-15 has the potential to serve as a quick and effective objective measure of LEP. Students with LEP may need academic accommodations to compensate for slower test completion time. Likewise, LEP status should be considered for exemption from failing performance validity tests to protect against false positive errors.
... Since two languages are present within each block, some trials are performed in the same language as the prior trial (repetition trials), whereas the other trials are performed in a different language as the prior trial (switch trials). These language switch trials typically elicit worse performance than language repetition trials (i.e., "language-switch costs") due to an increase of bilingual language interference, and thus an increase in conflict, of the nontarget language on the target language that has to be resolved (e.g., Costa & Santesteban, 2004;Gollan, Kleinman & Wierenga, 2014;Meuter & Allport, 1999;Peeters, Runnqvist, Bertrand & Grainger, 2014;Slevc, Davey & Linck, 2016). ...
... which indicates that the observed effect was not due to variability that was not captured by the model (cf. Slevc et al., 2016). However, there was a significant difference when comparing the full random effects model with the model without Language Transition varying by items (AIC: 2600; p < .001). ...
... When comparing the fit of our reduced model (AIC: 724) with a full random effects model (AIC: 746), we found that there was no difference between the two (p = .891). Thus, the observed interaction was not due to variability that was not captured by the model (cf.Slevc et al., 2016). ...
In the current study, we investigated bilingual error detection by measuring the repair rate of language intrusions (i.e., involuntary production of nontarget language words) that arose while bilinguals produced sentences in a language switching context. This allowed us to compare two prominent accounts of error detection in a bilingual setting. According to the conflict monitoring account, error detection is initiated by interference. Since language switching increases bilingual language interference, error detection should be better in switch relative to repetition trials. According to the perceptual loop theory, error detection is based on language comprehension. Since language switching is known to impair language comprehension, it follows that error detection should be worse in switch relative to repetition trials. The results showed that the repair rate of language intrusions was higher in switch than repetition trials, thus providing evidence that bilingual language interference instigates error detection, in line with the conflict monitoring account.
... Regardless of language dominance, bilinguals are slower when required to switch languages, but for unbalanced bilinguals, shifting from the nondominant to the dominant language incurs a greater switch cost than is observed in the other direction. This switch cost asymmetry is interpreted as evidence that re-engaging the dominant language after speaking the nondominant language is harder because the dominant language must be so strongly suppressed in order to produce the nondominant language (Costa & Santesteban, 2004, experiment 1;Jackson et al., 2001;Macizo et al., 2012, experiment 1;Meuter & Allport, 1999;Peeters & Dijkstra, 2018;Slevc et al., 2016). ...
... These individual differences in L2 proficiency within bilinguals enabled us to detect the complex interaction between L1 translation knowledge and proficiency that was not apparent at the group level. Critically, the individual differences analysis we conducted revealed two opposite results that have previously been found in separate studies: translation interference (Costa & Santesteban, 2004, experiment 1;Jackson et al., 2001;Macizo et al., 2012, experiment 1;Meuter & Allport, 1999;Peeters & Dijkstra, 2018;Slevc et al., 2016) and translation facilitation (Costa et al., 1999;Gollan & Acenas, 2004;Higby et al., 2020;Poulin-Dubois et al., 2013). ...
The effect of translation knowledge on bilingual lexical production is mixed, with some studies showing translation interference and others showing facilitation. We considered the roles of first-language (L1) translation knowledge and second-language (L2) proficiency in lexical retrieval, testing predictions of the competition for selection , frequency lag and activation boosting accounts. In experiment 1, 54 highly proficient Spanish–English bilinguals named pictures of low-frequency nouns in English (L2). Spanish (L1) translation knowledge and English proficiency had an interactive effect on tip-of-the-tongue experiences with increased L1 translation interference at low levels of L2 proficiency and facilitation at high levels of L2 proficiency, consistent with combined predictions of competition for selection and activation boosting accounts. Experiment 2 confirmed that confounding lexical variables did not drive translation effects. By examining individual differences within bilinguals, we found support for multiple mechanisms that play a role in bilingual lexical retrieval that were not evident at the group level.
... Yet, many studies where an asymmetrical switch cost pattern would be expected did not observe such an effect (e.g., Christoffels et al., 2007;Declerck et al., 2012;Ivanova & Hernandez, 2021;Kang et al., 2018;Slevc et al., 2016). Moreover, several recent studies even found larger L2 than L1 switch costs (Bonfieni et al., 2019;Declerck, Stephan et al., 2015;Liu, Timmer et al., 2019;Timmer et al., 2019;Zheng, Roelofs, Erkan et al., 2020; see also Declerck & Philipp, 2015b;Jevtović et al., 2019;Wu & Struys, 2021). ...
... Though, several studies have observed switch costs and even asymmetrical switch costs with "true" univalent linguistic stimuli (i.e., written words; e.g., Filippi et al., 2014;Macizo et al., 2012;Reynolds et al., 2016;Slevc et al., 2016), (2016) let bilinguals perform a comprehension task in both L1 and L2 and a production task in only one language. Their results showed language switch costs in the production task, even though only one language was used in this condition. ...
To achieve fluent language processing as a bilingual, a dominant theoretical framework assumes that the nontarget language is inhibited. This assumption is based on several empirical effects that are typically explained with inhibitory control. In the current article, we discuss four prominent effects linked to bilingual inhibition in language production (i.e., asymmetrical switch costs, n-2 language repetition costs, reversed language dominance, and the blocked language order effect). We argue that these effects require more empirical examination in order to arrive at a firmer basis for the assumption that inhibition plays a major role during bilingual language control. In particular, the empirical replicability of the phenomena themselves needs to be established more firmly, the underlying theoretical assumptions need further examination, and the alternative explanations of the empirical effects need to be scrutinized. In turn, we conclude that inhibitory control may provide a coherent framework for bilingual language production while outlining the challenges that the inhibition account still needs to face. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
... Note that even fully univalent stimuli can elicit language switch costs. For example, when switching between Chinese and English in reading aloud, bilinguals sometimes read the word, translated it automatically, and produced the translation instead of the written word (Li & Gollan, 2018), or simply exhibited switch costs (Slevc, Davey & Linck, 2016), even though English and Chinese orthography differ considerably in written form. Robust language switch costs were also found even in the presence of salient socio-culturally congruent cues in a picture-naming task (e.g., Asian face-Chinese, Caucasian face-English; see Liu, Timmer, Jiao, Yuan & Wang, 2019). ...
... However, we did find significant language switch costs on reading aloud responses in Experiment 1 ( ps < .01 for both languages), suggesting that language control was still needed. Though this comparison was across blocks in the present study, language switch costs within a reading aloud task have been shown in many other studies (Declerck, Koch, Duñabeitia, Grainger & Stephan, 2019;Filippi, Karaminis & Thomas, 2014;Gollan et al., 2014;Li & Gollan, 2018), and as just noted even with distinct orthographies (e.g., Chinese and English; Slevc et al., 2016). In addition, though they were rare and had been excluded from analyses, participants did occasionally produce accent errors in the present study (e.g., saying trigo with an ENGLISH ACCENT), suggesting that bilinguals needed to select a single language for response to complete the reading aloud task. ...
Spanish–English bilinguals switched between naming pictures in one language and either reading-aloud or semantically classifying written words in both languages. When switching between reading-aloud and picture-naming, bilinguals exhibited no language switch costs in picture-naming even though they produced overt language switches in speech. However, when switching between semantic classification and picture-naming, bilinguals, especially unbalanced bilinguals, exhibited switch costs in the dominant language and switch facilitation in the nondominant language even though they never switched languages overtly. These results reveal language switching across comprehension and production can be cost-free when the intention remains the same. Assuming switch costs at least partially reflect inhibition of the nontarget language, this implies such language control mechanisms are recruited only under demanding task conditions, especially for unbalanced bilinguals. These results provide striking demonstration of adaptive control mechanisms and call into question previous claims that language switch costs necessarily transfer from comprehension to production.
... To make the method as similar as possible to Experiments 1-3, we opted for a reading aloud task, in which written words of the two languages are read out loud. Prior research has indicated that language-switch costs can be observed with such a task (Filippi, Karaminis, & Thomas, 2012;Macizo et al., 2012;Reynolds et al., 2016;Slevc, Davey, & Linck, 2016). ...
... However, this does not explain why language-switch costs were observed when bilinguals had to read out loud in Experiment 4 (see also Filippi et al., 2012;Macizo et al., 2012;Reynolds et al., 2016;Slevc et al., 2016). Unlike picture naming, reading out loud does not necessarily activate the translation-equivalent, since lexical access is based on orthographic information, similar to what happens during bilingual language comprehension. ...
In the current study, we set out to investigate language control, which is the process that minimizes cross-language interference, during bilingual language comprehension. According to current theories of bilingual language comprehension, language-switch costs, which are a marker for reactive language control, should be observed. However, a closer look at the literature shows that this is not always the case. Furthermore, little to no evidence for language-mixing costs, which are a marker for proactive language control, has been observed in the bilingual language comprehension literature. This is in line with current theories of bilingual language comprehension, as they do not explicitly account for proactive language control. In the current study, we further investigated these two markers of language control and found no evidence for comprehension-based language-switch costs in six experiments, even though other types of switch costs were observed with the exact same setup (i.e., task-switch costs, stimulus modality-switch costs, and production-based language-switch costs). Furthermore, only one out of three experiments showed comprehension-based language-mixing costs, providing the first tentative evidence for proactive language control during bilingual language comprehension. The implications of the absence and occurrence of these costs are discussed in terms of processing speed and parallel language activation. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2019 APA, all rights reserved).
... There are several reasons, however, why this straightforward view of bilingual language control is problematic. First, the switch cost asymmetry in unbalanced bilinguals has not always been replicated (Declerck, Koch & Philipp, 2012;Slevc, Davey & Linck, 2016). Second, the switch cost asymmetry has been sensitive to changes in experimental design, procedure, and participant characteristics. ...
... Whereas asymmetrical switch costs in unbalanced bilinguals were interpreted in line with transient inhibitory mechanisms (e.g., Meuter & Allport, 1999), symmetrical switch costs in highly proficient, balanced bilinguals would indicate the absence of such a reactive, transient mechanism when bilinguals master two languages to a similar extent (Costa & Santesteban, 2004). It is problematic for this proposed distinction between balanced and unbalanced bilinguals that the switch costs asymmetry in unbalanced bilinguals is not always replicated (e.g., Christoffels et al., 2007;Declerck et al., 2012;Gollan & Ferreira, 2009;Slevc et al., 2016). The current study confirms that the switch cost symmetry is not restricted to balanced bilinguals, by consistently showing, across different instantiations of the cued language-switching paradigm, a symmetrical switch cost pattern in clearly unbalanced bilinguals. ...
Bilinguals often switch languages as a function of the language background of their addressee. The control mechanisms supporting bilinguals' ability to select the contextually appropriate language are heavily debated. Here we present four experiments in which unbalanced bilinguals named pictures in their first language Dutch and their second language English in mixed and blocked contexts. Immersive virtual reality technology was used to increase the ecological validity of the cued language-switching paradigm. Behaviorally, we consistently observed symmetrical switch costs, reversed language dominance, and asymmetrical mixing costs. These findings indicate that unbalanced bilinguals apply sustained inhibition to their dominant L1 in mixed language settings. Consequent enhanced processing costs for the L1 in a mixed versus a blocked context were reflected by a sustained positive component in event-related potentials. Methodologically, the use of virtual reality opens up a wide range of possibilities to study language and communication in bilingual and other communicative settings.
... This effect is referred to as switch costs. Importantly, an asymmetry is often reported by which these switch costs are larger in the more proficient language (e.g., Meuter & Allport, 1999;Slevc, Davey, & Linck, 2016), although conflicting results have also been reported (Liu et al., 2019;Mosca & Clahsen, 2016). Asymmetrical switch costs are believed to arise because the more proficient language is activated more strongly. ...
Numbers and pictures are the two most frequently used types of experimental stimuli in bilingual language control studies. However, the potential qualitative differences in the representation and processing of these stimuli could involve the recruitment of divergent cognitive mechanisms. This paper investigates the influence of stimulus type (numbers vs pictures) on language processing in bilingual comprehension, specifically examining whether semantic connections between numbers impact language switching. We tested Chinese-English-Spanish trilinguals in two cross-modal matching tasks (i.e., a picture-word matching task and a magnitude-number matching task) in the context of the n-2 language switching paradigm. Contrary to the n-2 repetition cost observed in previous studies employing the same paradigm, our findings reveal an n-2 repetition benefit. Crucially, the n-2 repetition effect was observed only with numbers. We discuss the findings in relation to the prevalent language control mechanisms and how lexical associations between numbers may give rise to the observed difference.
... On a socio-cultural level, bilingual individuals face identity and belonging issues while navigating different linguistic communities. Proficiency in each language can impact self-esteem, as individuals may feel pressured to conform to linguistic norms in various social contexts (Bialystok, Craik, & Luk, 2012;Slevc, Davey, & Linck, 2016). Barak et al. claimed that bilingual children often encounter internal conflict when using language, leading to errors in word usage or avoidance of using certain words altogether. ...
The present study examines the effectiveness of play therapy (based on the cognitive–behavioural approach) and puppet play therapy in expressive\ receptive language disorders of the studied population. Here, we imported 45 female bilingual preschool children to our research. Their expressive\ receptive language disorders have been approved previously based on our criteria and randomly divided into two experimental and control groups.
In the pre-test stages, all participants completed The language development test (TOLD3) to evaluate expressive\ receptive language disorders. During the intervention, the experimental groups received the educational play therapy programme and puppet play therapy, while the control group did not receive any intervention. After the intervention, all groups were examined again in the post-test stages.
Our findings demonstrated that cognitive–behavioural play therapy is more significantly effective than puppet play therapy in improving expressive \ receptive language disorders.
... In contrast, on a L1 trial, L2 does not require as much inhibition and can therefore be activated more easily on a subsequent trial. However, such asymmetrical switch costs are not always found and may be more dependent on moderator variables such as participant characteristics than previously thought (Declerck et al., 2012;Declerck & Koch, 2022;Declerck & Philipp, 2015a;Gade et al., 2021;Slevc et al., 2016). ...
While language switching of bilinguals has been investigated extensively in the spoken domain, there has been little research on switching while writing. The factors that impact written language switching may differ from those that impact language switching while speaking. Thus, the study’s goal was to test to what extent phonological and/or orthographic overlap impacts written language switching. In four experiments, German-English bilinguals completed a cued language switching task where responses had to be typed. To-be-named translation-equivalent concepts were selected to be similar phonologically, orthographically or neither. Participants’ switching between languages while writing was facilitated by both phonological as well as orthographic overlap. Maximum orthographic overlap between translation-equivalent words with dissimilar pronunciations facilitated switching to the extent that no switch costs could be observed. These results imply that overlapping orthography can strongly facilitate written language switching and that orthography’s role should be considered more thoroughly in models of bilingual language production.
... There are a few studies that even reported evidence which is challenging the findings by Meuter and Allport. Plenty of studies have found no difference in switch costs across languages (e.g., Christoffels et al. 2007;Declerck et al. 2012;Slevc et al. 2016) and some studies even observed larger L2 than L1 switch costs (e.g., Declerck et al. 2015a, b;Zheng et al. 2020). More recently Gade et al. (2021) evaluated the evidence of two empirical pointers of inhibitory processes in language control, namely reactive language control and proactive language control. ...
Language is one of the fascinating abilities of the human species. The beauty of language becomes intriguing when we examine language processing among bilinguals. This work attempted to study the effects of language dominance among native Hindi speakers who were either Hindi dominant, English dominant, or balanced bilingual in a language switching task. The task required the participants to read aloud the number-words that were presented singly on the computer screen. The findings support the inhibitory control model's predictions as the results were indicative of asymmetrical switch cost for both the Hindi and English dominant bilinguals. In both the language dominance condition, moving back to the dominant language from a non-dominant language required more time than vice versa. The results also indicated overall reduced reaction time in the reading task performance for balanced bilinguals, further demonstrating the benefits of balanced bilingualism.
... The absence of switch costs asymmetry found among current participants with unbalanced proficiency in two languages was inconsistent with previous findings (e.g., Gollan & Ferreira, 2009;Peeters & Dijkstra, 2018;Slevc, Davey & Linck, 2016). Previous studies (e.g., Costa & Santesteban, 2004;Costa, Santesteban & Ivanova, 2006;Linck, Schwieter & Sunderman, 2012;Meuter & Allport, 1999) have discussed that the asymmetrical pattern of switch costs in L1 and L2 is associated with unbalanced bilinguals' different extents of transient control of two languages, while switch cost symmetry is assumed to associate with balanced-proficient bilinguals as their transient control of two languages during bilingual language processing is comparably strong. ...
This study explored how bilingual code-switching habits affect cognitive shifting and inhibition. Habitual code-switching from 31 Mandarin-English bilingual adults were collected through the Language and Social Background Questionnaire (Anderson et al., 2018) and the Bilingual Switching Questionnaire (Rodriguez-Fornells et al., 2012). All participants performed verbal and nonverbal switching tasks, including the verbal fluency task, a bilingual picture-naming and colour-shape switching task. A Go/No-go task was administered to measure the inhibitory control of participants.
Frequent bilingual switchers showed less efforts and time costs in switching into naming pictures in Chinese as well as switching across different nonverbal tasks in the colour-shape switching task. Additionally, bilinguals intensively engaged in dense code-switching practices showed advantages in conflicts monitoring and inhibition in the Go/No-go task. The cooperative control of two language in participants’ dense code-switching practices was observed. Overall, the study, observing not only the connections between intensity of single-language context experience and goal maintenance efficiency, partially supported the Adaptive Control Hypothesis (ACH)’ prediction (Green & Abutalebi, 2013). However, it also indicated the facilitations of dense code-switching experience on response inhibition proficiency, which was inconsistent with ACH’s prediction. The practical implications of how different bilingual language experiences affect human cognition are discussed.
... This is in line with sentence production studies such as Gullifer et al. (2013; see also Declerck & Philipp, 2015b), but not in line with Tarłowski et al., (2013). A similar confusing pattern of the RLDE has been observed in the single word production literature, with some studies observing an RLDE (e.g., Christoffels et al., 2007), others finding no language dominance effect (e.g., Slevc, Davey, & Linck, 2016), and still other studies showing better L1 than L2 performance in mixed language blocks (e.g., Ma et al., 2016). Hence, it is difficult to say at this time whether the RLDE is a robust effect or not. ...
Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions
While evidence for proactive language control processes has been found during single word production, very little and conflicting evidence has been observed for such control processes during sentence production. So, the main goal of this study was to investigate whether proactive language control can occur during sentence production.
Design/methodology/approach
To investigate proactive language control during sentence production, we relied on a description task in single and mixed language blocks.
Data and analysis
Mixing costs and the reversed language dominance effect of language intrusions and filled pauses were used to examine proactive language control.
Findings/conclusions
Evidence for proactive language control during sentence production came from the mixing cost effect observed with both language intrusions and filled pauses. Whereas no reversed language dominance effect was observed in mixed language blocks, a significant difference in language pattern was observed between single and mixed language blocks, indicating that proactive language control of the first language might be implemented in mixed language blocks during sentence production.
Originality
Unlike the vast majority of studies investigating language control, this study relied on sentence production instead of single word production. Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, this is the first study to examine filled pauses to gain insight into language control.
Significance/implications
These data indicate that proactive language control can be implemented during bilingual sentence production.
... Or are the two linguistic systems interconnected, the effects MOVING FROM BILINGUAL TRAITS TO STATES 5 of which can be observed even in monolingual environments? Findings from bilingual comprehension studies routinely show that words from both languages are simultaneously activated even in single-language contexts, including when a bilingual's two languages use different scripts or modalities (Hoshino & Kroll, 2008;Marian & Spivey, 2003;Morford et al., 2011;Slevc et al., 2016;Spivey & Marian, 1999;Thierry & Wu, 2007). That is, as spoken words unfold in time, bilinguals do not limit retrieval to the language currently in use, as lexical items from the currently unused language partially compete for selection. ...
The study of how bilingualism is linked to cognitive processing, including executive functioning, has historically focused on comparing bilinguals to monolinguals across a range of tasks. These group comparisons presume to capture relatively stable cognitive traits and have revealed important insights about the architecture of the language processing system that could not have been gleaned from studying monolinguals alone. However, there are drawbacks to using a groupcomparison, or Traits, approach. In this theoretical review, we outline some limitations of treating executive functions as stable traits and of treating bilinguals as a uniform group when comparing to monolinguals. To build on what we have learned from group comparisons, we advocate for an emerging complementary approach to the question of cognition and bilingualism. Using an approach that compares bilinguals to themselves under different linguistic or cognitive contexts allows researchers to ask questions about how language and cognitive processes interact based on dynamically fluctuating cognitive and neural states. A States approach, which has already been used by bilingualism researchers, allows for cause-and-effect hypotheses and shifts our focus from questions of group differences to questions of how varied linguistic environments influence cognitive operations in the moment and how fluctuations in cognitive engagement impact language processing.
... It is argued that switching between languages is more costly than staying in the same language [manifested as longer response time (RT) and more performance errors], and switching into the more dominant language is even more costly (Meuter and Allport, 1999;Costa and Santesteban, 2004;Costa et al., 2006). This asymmetrical pattern of switching cost, as mentioned before, has been considered the main support for the IC model and has received much empirical support in the literature, especially related to production-based switch costs (Meuter and Allport, 1999;Jackson et al., 2001;Costa and Santesteban, 2004;Philipp et al., 2007;Declerck et al., 2012;Macizo et al., 2012;Filippi et al., 2014;Slevc et al., 2016). ...
This study investigated the effect of non-task language in a language switching experiment. Non-task language refers to participants’ languages (regardless of proficiency level) that are not used in any trials throughout the experiment. We recruited 60 Tibetan-Chinese-English trilinguals (12th-grade high school students with a median age of 17) to perform a lexical decision (word vs. non-word) task in only two of their languages. We repeated the experiment three times to present each language pair once. In each experiment, the participants were divided into two groups that significantly contrasted with each other in their non-task language while remaining comparable in the two task languages. Response time (RT) and error rate (ER) have been examined to evaluate task performance. The interaction between task performance and the participants’ proficiency in the non-task language was also examined. The results showed anull effect of language switching. In addition, the effect of the non-task language was not found. These results were interpreted with reference to the main models of bilingual visual word recognition and the role of orthography specificity.
... In principle, our strict counterbalancing of tasks, conditions, languages (and even phonemes in the phonological fluency tasks) suggests that the present results cannot be attributed to disproportionate interferences between languages for each group due to aspects of the study's design. However, it may be the case that asymmetrical patterns of interactions between the L1 and L2 (Heikoop et al., 2016;Slevca, Daveya & Linck, 2016) influenced the observed language effects (which consistently yielded better performance in L1). Further research would be needed to ascertain the specific role of potential cross-linguistic (including interference) effects during lexical processing in PSIs. ...
This study assessed whether bilingual memory is susceptible to the extreme processing demands of professional simultaneous interpreters (PSIs). Seventeen PSIs and 17 non-interpreter bilinguals completed word production, lexical retrieval, and verbal fluency tasks. PSIs exhibited enhanced fluency in their two languages, and they were faster to translate words in both directions. However, no significant differences emerged in picture naming or word reading. This suggests that lexical enhancements in PSIs are confined to their specifically trained abilities (vocabulary search, interlingual reformulation), with no concomitant changes in other word-processing mechanisms. Importantly, these differences seem to reflect specifically linguistic effects, as both samples were matched for relevant executive skills. Moreover, only word translation performance correlated with the PSIs’ years of interpreting experience. Therefore, despite their tight cooperation, different subcomponents within bilingual memory seem characterized by independent, usage-driven flexibility.
... ; L1 Chinese -L2 English,Jin, Zhang & Li, 2014;Liu, Fan, Rossi, Yao & Chen, 2016;Slevc, Davey & Linck, 2016). Therefore, the facilitation effect found in the L2 of the bilinguals tested in Publications I and IV can hardly be attributed to language typology. ...
For several decades, researchers have tried to explain how speakers of more than one language (multilinguals) manage to keep their languages separate and to switch from one language to the other depending on the context. This ability of multilingual speakers to use the intended language, while avoiding interference from the other language(s) has recently been termed “language control”. A multitude of studies showed that when bilinguals process one language, the other language is also activated and might compete for selection. According to the most influential model of language control developed over the last two decades, competition from the non-intended language is solved via inhibition. In particular, the Inhibitory Control (IC) model proposed by Green (1998) puts forward that the amount of inhibition applied to the non-relevant language depends on its dominance, in that the stronger the language the greater the strength of inhibition applied to it. Within this account, the cost required to reactivate a previously inhibited language depends on the amount of inhibition previously exerted on it, that is, reactivation costs are greater for a stronger compared to a weaker language. In a nutshell, according to the IC model, language control is determined by language dominance. The goal of the present dissertation is to investigate the extent to which language control in multilinguals is affected by language dominance and whether and how other factors might influence this process. Three main factors are considered in this work: (i) the time speakers have to prepare for a certain language or PREPARATION TIME, (ii) the type of languages involved in the interactional context or LANGUAGE TYPOLOGY, and (iii) the PROCESSING MODALITY, that is, whether the way languages are controlled differs between reception and production. The results obtained in the four manuscripts, either published or in revision, indicate that language dominance alone does not suffice to explain language switching patterns. In particular, the present thesis shows that language control is profoundly affected by each of the three variables described above. More generally, the findings obtained in the present dissertation indicate that language control in multilingual speakers is a much more dynamic system than previously believed and is not exclusively determined by language dominance, as predicted by the IC model (Green, 1998).
... Thus, the observed effects were not due to variability that was not captured by the model (cf. Declerck, Lemhöfer, & Grainger, 2016;Slevc, Davey, & Linck, 2016). The same goes for Experiment 2 (reduced model AIC = 15406; full random effects model AIC = 15421; difference: p = 0.968), and Experiment 3 (reduced model AIC = 29082; full random effects model AIC = 29182; difference: p = 0.999) where additionally the interactions did not vary by participants in the reduced model. ...
The most widely discussed observation in the language control literature is the larger cost found when switching into the first than the second language (i.e., asymmetrical switch costs), which has been determined as a marker of persisting, reactive inhibition. While this is a common effect in bilingual language production, it generally does not occur in bilingual language comprehension. In this bilingual language comprehension study, we manipulated the relative activation of languages by letting participants practice in pure language blocks prior to a mixed language block. While no effect was found of practicing second-language words, asymmetrical switch costs were observed when practicing the same (Experiments 1 and 2) or different first-language words (Experiment 3) as in the following mixed language block. These findings indicate that, similar to bilingual production, bilingual comprehension relies on persisting, reactive language control.
... For a bilingual person, lexical access is assumed to be much more complicated because concept selection activates two lexical representations. This complexity of bilingual's lexical access is the fundamental problem in studying bilingual speech production [2,3]. ...
... Costa and Santesteban, 2004;Declerck et al., 2012), as well as for reading words aloud (e.g. Filippi et al., 2014;Macizo et al., 2012;Reynolds et al., 2016;Slevc et al., 2016). The most prominent explanation for these findings posits inhibitory control of the non-target language (Green, 1998; though alternative accounts have been proposed, e.g., Philipp et al., 2007;Verhoef et al., 2009). ...
Bilinguals have the unique ability to produce utterances that switch between languages. Most language switching research has focused on isolated, unrelated items, which emphasizes separation of the languages. Fewer studies examined the cognitive and neural mechanisms of switching languages in natural discourse. The present study examined the effect of codeswitching direction on the comprehension of intra-sentential codeswitching in Spanish-English bilinguals, using self-paced reading behavioral measurements (Experiment 1) and electroencephalography (EEG) measurements (Experiment 2), analyzed via both event-related potentials (ERPs) and time-frequency analysis (TFR). Reading times showed a significant switching cost for codeswitched sentences in both codeswitching directions, though switching costs were somewhat higher into the dominant language than into the weaker language. ERPs showed that codeswitched as compared to non-switched words elicited a late positivity, but only when switching from the dominant into the weaker language, not in the reverse direction. TFRs showed complementary and converging results: switches into the weaker language resulted in a power decrease in lower beta band while switches into the dominant language resulted in a power increase in theta band. These multi-method findings provide novel insights into neurocognitive resources engaged in the comprehension of intra-sentential codeswitches related to sentence-level restructuring processes to activate and access the weaker language.
... Neither was there a significant difference in German and English neighborhood effect and amount of syllables, ts < 1.2 When comparing the fit of our reduced model (AIC: 39239) with a full random effects model (AIC: 39789), we found that there was no difference between the two (p = .991). Thus, the observed effects were not due to variability that was not captured by the model (cf.Declerck, Lemhöfer, & Grainger, 2016;Slevc, Davey, & Linck, 2016). ...
Several models have proposed that language control occurs between language representations, such as language tags, and between lemmas. Yet, most research has solely focused on language-control processes between language representations. In the present study, we investigated whether language control can also occur between lemmas by allowing bilinguals to practice a language or language-specific items prior to a language-switching task, and thus change the relative activation of the language representations and/or lemmas. By changing the activation levels, relatively more language control should occur for this language representation and/or lemma relative to their translation-equivalent due to the reactive nature of language control. The results showed that this was all the more so when language-specific items were practiced than when merely a language was practiced. Hence, the current study provides evidence that language control is not restricted to language representations, but could also occur between lemmas.
It is intriguing to learn how language interacts with our cognitive control system. The phenomena of bilingual language control provide us with a perfect window to scrutinize this research topic. Studies on cognitive mechanisms of bilingual language control from 1998 to 2023 were systematically reviewed. Experiment paradigms, hypotheses, behavioral markers, and the relationships between language and non-language control mechanisms were discussed. Nevertheless, several issues remain to be solved in the future. The relationship between reactive and proactive bilingual language control mechanisms is largely unclear. Supera-lexicon level (i.e., phrasal) language control was overlooked by previous studies. “Language control” per se should be re-defined through a more precise comparison with non-language control.
Multilinguals often switch between the languages they speak. One open question is to what extent they can use anticipatory—or proactive—language control to reduce interference from non-target languages during language switching. In three experiments, unbalanced German-English bilinguals (N1 = 24; N2 = 35; N3 = 37) named pictures in their L1 or L2 in mixed blocks. In all but the penultimate block, the language sequence in which pictures were named was predictable (e.g., L1, L1, L2, L2, etc.), thus allowing participants to prepare for upcoming trials. Performance in the non-predictable block was compared to average performance in predictable sequence blocks right before and after, thus controlling for practice effects. We predicted that language switching would be facilitated during predictable language trials, indicative of proactive language control. However, for Experiments 1–2, there was no evidence for a predictability benefit across both experiments. When the number of items that had to be switched between was reduced to two (Experiment 3), a limited repetition-specific predictability effect emerged. These findings suggest that people do not use preparatory processes endogenously on the basis of regularities in the language sequence to reduce interference during language switching, unless the specific item that needs to be produced can be anticipated.
Aims and objectives
Studies of code-switching (CS) in bilingual speakers using laboratory tasks have been equivocal on whether CS is cognitively demanding. The goal of this study was to examine time costs at the juncture of a CS in a more ecologically valid experimental paradigm.
Methodology
English (L1)–French (L2) bilingual speakers performed two tasks. The primary experimental task was a novel paradigm that elicited voluntary code-switches in conversation with a bilingual interlocutor. A silent self-paced reading task was used to compare with a laboratory task with involuntary switches.
Data and analysis
Intersyllabic durations (conversation task) and reading times (reading task) were analyzed. CS cost was the time difference between code-switches and matched non-switches. Cost-switching costs for each switch direction (English-to-French and French-to-English) and type of switch (alternations and insertions) were also compared.
Findings
Code-switches in conversation were associated with a time cost, and the magnitude was comparable in both directions although speakers more frequently switched from French-to-English. In self-paced reading, switching costs were observed only for switches into the dominant language. Across both tasks, there were no differences in CS time cost between insertions and alternations.
Originality
This study reports a novel measure of CS costs in conversation, intersyllabic duration, and provides a cross-task comparison in the same group of bilingual speakers to better inform theories of CS.
Implications
Bilingual speakers experience a time cost when making voluntary switches in conversations. The symmetrical switch costs suggest that both languages have similar activation levels throughout the conversation, and the cognitive costs arise from the act of momentarily switching languages, irrespective of their dominance. In self-paced reading, cognitive costs arise from disturbing the status quo of relative activation-inhibition of each language adopted to perform the task. The comparable CS time cost for insertions and alternations suggests similar cognitive control and linguistic planning mechanisms for both types of switches.
Bilinguals occasionally produce language intrusion errors (inadvertent translations of the intended word), especially when attempting to produce function word targets, and often when reading aloud mixed-language paragraphs. We investigate whether these errors are due to a failure of attention during speech planning, or failure of monitoring speech output by classifying errors based on whether and when they were corrected, and investigating eye movement behaviour surrounding them. Prior research on this topic has primarily tested alphabetic languages (e.g., Spanish–English bilinguals) in which part of speech is confounded with word length, which is related to word skipping (i.e., decreased attention). Therefore, we tested 29 Chinese–English bilinguals whose languages differ in orthography, visually cueing language membership, and for whom part of speech (in Chinese) is less confounded with word length. Despite the strong orthographic cue, Chinese–English bilinguals produced intrusion errors with similar effects as previously reported (e.g., especially with function word targets written in the dominant language). Gaze durations did differ by whether errors were made and corrected or not, but these patterns were similar for function and content words and therefore cannot explain part of speech effects. However, bilinguals regressed to words produced as errors more often than to correctly produced words, but regressions facilitated correction of errors only for content, not for function words. These data suggest that the vulnerability of function words to language intrusion errors primarily reflects automatic retrieval and failures of speech monitoring mechanisms from stopping function versus content word errors after they are planned for production.
The current study investigated the hypothesis that cognates (i.e., translation equivalents that overlap in form, e.g., lemon is limón in Spanish) facilitate language switches. Spanish-English bilinguals were cued to switch languages while repeatedly naming pictures with cognate versus noncognate names in separate (Experiment 1) or mixed (Experiments 2 and 3) blocks. In all 3 experiments, on the first presentation of each picture, cognates elicited significantly smaller switch costs and were produced faster than noncognates only on switch trials. However, cognate switch-facilitation effects were eliminated (Experiment 2) or reversed (i.e., larger switch costs for cognates than noncognates, in Experiment 3) in mixed blocks with the repeated presentation of a stimulus, largely because of the increasingly slower responses for cognates on switch trials. Cognates may facilitate switches because of increased dual-language activation, which is inhibited on nonswitch trials. With repeated presentation of the same pictures, dual-language activation may feed backup to the lexical level, increasing competition for selection. In contrast, when naming pictures in a cognate block, bilinguals may avoid discrimination problems at the lexical level by adaptively focusing less on activation at the phonological level. Cross-language overlap in phonology appears to influence language selection at both the phonological and lexical levels, involving multiple cognitive mechanisms and reflecting both automatic processes and rapid adaptation to contextual variations in the extent of dual-language activation.
Language switching has been one of the main tasks to investigate language control, a process that restricts bilingual language processing to the target language. In the current review, we discuss the How (i.e., mechanisms) and Where (i.e., locus of these mechanisms) of language control in language switching. As regards the mechanisms of language control, we describe several empirical markers of language switching and their relation to inhibition, as a potentially important mechanism of language control. From this overview it becomes apparent that some, but not all, markers indicate the occurrence of inhibition during language switching and, thus, language control. In a second part, we turn to the potential locus of language control and the role of different processing stages (concept level, lemma level, phonology, orthography, and outside language processing). Previous studies provide evidence for the employment of several of these processing stages during language control so that either a complex control mechanism involving different processing stages and/or multiple loci of language control have to be assumed. Based on the discussed results, several established and new theoretical avenues are considered.
The current study contrasted cued versus voluntary switching to investigate switching efficiency and possible sharing of control mechanisms across linguistic and nonlinguistic domains. Bilinguals switched between naming pictures in Spanish versus English or between reading numbers aloud versus adding their digits, either without or with repetition of stimuli and with fewer requirements as to when and how much they had to switch relative to previous instantiations of voluntary switching. Without repetition (Experiment 1), voluntary responses were faster than cued responses on both stay and switch trials (especially in the nonlinguistic switching task), whereas in previous studies the voluntary advantage was restricted to switch-cost reduction. Similarly, when targets were presented repeatedly (Experiment 2), voluntary responses were faster overall for both linguistic and nonlinguistic switching, although here the advantage tended to be larger on switch trials and cross-domain similarity appeared to reflect nonoverlapping switching strategies. Experiment 3 confirmed the overall voluntary speed advantage for the read-add task in monolinguals and revealed a reduction in switch costs only for a different nonlinguistic task (size-parity judgments). These results reveal greater overall advantages for voluntary over cued switching than previously reported but also that the precise manifestation of the voluntary advantage can vary with different tasks. In the linguistic domain, lexical inaccessibility introduces some unique control mechanisms, and repetition may magnify cross-domain overlap in control mechanisms. Finally, under some limited conditions, cost-free switches were found in both linguistic and nonlinguistic domains; however, suspension of top-down control may be restricted to language or highly automatic tasks. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2014 APA, all rights reserved).
One key issue in bilingualism is how bilinguals control production, particularly to produce words in the less dominant language. Language switching is one method to investigate control processes. Language switching has been much studied in comprehension, e.g., in lexical decision task, but less so in production. Here we first present a study of language switching in Italian–English adult bilinguals in a naming task for visually presented words. We demonstrate an asymmetric pattern of time costs to switch language, where participants incurred a greater time cost to switch into naming in their dominant language (Italian). In addition, costs were greater where the stimuli were interlingual cognates or homographs than words existing in only one language, implicating lexical competition as a source of the cost. To clarify the operation of control processes, we then present two connectionist models of bilingual naming, based on the previous models of Seidenberg and McClelland (1989), Cohen, Dunbar and McClelland (1990), Gilbert and Shallice (2002), and Karaminis and Thomas (2010). Crucially, both models acquired their differential language dominance via an experience-dependent learning process. The models embody different assumptions about the language control processes that produce the switch cost. We consider which processing assumptions are sufficient to explain asymmetric language switch costs and word class effects on language switching in individual word reading, as well as generating novel predictions for future testing.
This study examined the asymmetrical language switching cost in a word reading task (Experiment 1) and in a categorization task (Experiment 2 and 3). In Experiment 1, Spanish–English bilinguals named words in first language (L1) and second language (L2) in a switching paradigm. They were slower to switch from their weaker L2 to their more dominant L1 than from L1 to L2. In Experiment 2 and 3, high vs. low English proficiency bilinguals decided whether a word visually presented in their L1 or L2 referred to an animate or to an inanimate entity. In this case, bilinguals did not show asymmetrical cost when they switched between languages. These results suggest that inhibitory processes in bilingual processing as indexed by the asymmetrical language switching cost are only observed when L1 and L2 lexical representations compete for selection (e.g. word naming task). In addition, L2 proficiency did not influence the absence of asymmetrical switching cost.
We examined language-switching effects in French-English bilinguals using a paradigm where pictures are always named in the same language (either French or English) within a block of trials, and on each trial, the picture is preceded by a printed word from the same language or from the other language. Participants had to either make a language decision on the word or categorize it as an animal name or not. Picture-naming latencies in French (Language 1 [L1]) were slower when pictures were preceded by an English word than by a French word, independently of the task performed on the word. There were no language-switching effects when pictures were named in English (L2). This pattern replicates asymmetrical switch costs found with the cued picture-naming paradigm and shows that the asymmetrical pattern can be obtained (a) in the absence of artificial (nonlinguistic) language cues, (b) when the switch involves a shift from comprehension in 1 language to production in another, and (c) when the naming language is blocked (univalent response). We concluded that language switch costs in bilinguals cannot be reduced to effects driven by task control or response-selection mechanisms. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2013 APA, all rights reserved).
Speech comprehension and production are governed by control processes. We explore their nature and
dynamics in bilingual speakers with a focus on speech production. Prior research indicates that
individuals increase cognitive control in order to achieve a desired goal. In the adaptive control
hypothesis we propose a stronger hypothesis: Language control processes themselves adapt to the
recurrent demands placed on them by the interactional context. Adapting a control process means
changing a parameter or parameters about the way it works (its neural capacity or efficiency) or the way
it works in concert, or in cascade, with other control processes (e.g., its connectedness). We distinguish
eight control processes (goal maintenance, conflict monitoring, interference suppression, salient cue
detection, selective response inhibition, task disengagement, task engagement, opportunistic planning).
We consider the demands on these processes imposed by three interactional contexts (single language,
dual language, and dense code-switching). We predict adaptive changes in the neural regions and circuits
associated with specific control processes. A dual-language context, for example, is predicted to lead to
the adaptation of a circuit mediating a cascade of control processes that circumvents a control dilemma.
Effective test of the adaptive control hypothesis requires behavioural and neuroimaging work that
assesses language control in a range of tasks within the same individual.
Linear mixed-effects models (LMEMs) have become increasingly prominent in psycholinguistics and related areas. However, many researchers do not seem to appreciate how random effects structures affect the generalizability of an analysis. Here, we argue that researchers using LMEMs for confirmatory hypothesis testing should minimally adhere to the standards that have been in place for many decades. Through theoretical arguments and Monte Carlo simulation, we show that LMEMs generalize best when they include the maximal random effects structure justified by the design. The generalization performance of LMEMs including data-driven random effects structures strongly depends upon modeling criteria and sample size, yielding reasonable results on moderately-sized samples when conservative criteria are used, but with little or no power advantage over maximal models. Finally, random-intercepts-only LMEMs used on within-subjects and/or within-items data from populations where subjects and/or items vary in their sensitivity to experimental manipulations always generalize worse than separate F1 and F2 tests, and in many cases, even worse than F1 alone. Maximal LMEMs should be the ‘gold standard’ for confirmatory hypothesis testing in psycholinguistics and beyond.
Models of bilingual speech production generally assume that translation equivalent lexical nodes share a common semantic representation. Though this type of architecture is highly desirable on both theoretical and empirical grounds, it could create difficulty at the point of lexical selection. If two translation equivalent lexical nodes are activated to roughly equal levels every time that their shared semantic representation becomes activated, the lexical selection mechanism should find it difficult to “decide” between the two (the “hard problem”) – yet in some cases bilinguals benefit from the presence of a translation equivalent “competitor”. In this article, we review three models that have been proposed as solutions to the hard problem. Each of these models has difficulty accounting for the full range of findings in the literature but we suggest that these shortcomings stem from their acceptance of the assumption that lexical selection is competitive. We argue that without this assumption each proposal is able to provide a full account of the empirical findings. We conclude by suggesting that the simplest of these proposals should be rejected before more complicated models are considered.
The measurement of “switch costs” is held to be of interest because, as is widely believed, they may reflect the control
processes that are engaged when subjects switch between two (or more) competing tasks. [In task-switching experiments, the
reaction time (RT) switch cost is typically measured as the difference in RT between switch and non-switch (repeat) trials.]
In this report we focus on the RT switch costs that remain even after the subject has had some time to prepare for the shift
of task, when the switch cost may be approximately asymptotic (so-called residual switch costs). Three experiments are presented.
All three experiments used Stroop colour/word, and neutral stimuli. Participants performed the two tasks of word-reading and
colour-naming in a regular, double alternation, using the “alternating runs” paradigm (R. D. Rogers & S. Monsell, 1995). The
experiments were designed to test the hypothesis that RT switch costs depend on a form of proactive interference (PI) arising
from the performance of a prior, competing task. A. Allport, E. A. Styles and S. Hsieh (1994) suggested that these PI effects
resulted from “task-set inertia”, that is, the persisting activation-suppression of competing task-sets, or competing task-processing
pathways. The results confirmed the existence of long-lasting PI from the competing task as a major contributor to switch
costs. Non-switch trials, used as the baseline in the measurement of switch costs, were also shown to be strongly affected
by similar PI effects. However, task-set inertia was not sufficient to account for these results. The results appeared inconsistent
also with all other previous models of task switching. A new hypothesis to explain these between-task interference effects
was developed, based on the stimulus-triggered retrieval of competing stimulus-response (S-R) associations, acquired (or strengthened)
in earlier trials. Consistent with this retrieval hypothesis, switch costs were shown to depend primarily on the S-R characteristics
of the preceding task (the task that was switched from) rather than the upcoming task. Further, the effects of the other,
competing task were found to persist over many successive switching trials, affecting switch costs long after the stimulus
overlap (and hence the principal S-R competition) between the current tasks had been removed. Switch costs were also found
to be affected by recent, item-specific experience with a given stimulus, in either the same or the competing task. Finally,
the results showed that switch costs were massively affected by the ratio of the number of prior trials, in response to the
same stimuli, that had implemented either the currently intended or the competing S-R mappings. None of these effects are
predicted by current models of residual switch costs, which appeal to the differences in control processes assumed to be engaged
in switch versus non-switch trials.
There have been several reports in the literature of faster visual lexical decisions to words that are semantically ambiguous. All current models of this ambiguity advantage assume that it is the presence of multiple unrelated meanings that produce this benefit. A set of three lexical decision experiments reported here challenge this assumption. We contrast the ambiguity seen in words like bark, which have multiple unrelated meanings, with words that have multiple related word senses (e.g., twist). In all three experiments we find that while multiple word senses do produce faster responses, ambiguity between multiple meanings delays recognition. These results suggest that, while competition between the multiple meanings of ambiguous words delays their recognition, the rich semantic representations associated with words with many senses facilitate their recognition.
The task-switching paradigm offers enormous possibilities to study cognitive control as well as task interference. The current review provides an overview of recent research on both topics. First, we review different experimental approaches to task switching, such as comparing mixed-task blocks with single-task blocks, predictable task-switching and task-cuing paradigms, intermittent instructions, and voluntary task selection. In the 2nd part, we discuss findings on preparatory control mechanisms in task switching and theoretical accounts of task preparation. We consider preparation processes in two-stage models, consider preparation as an all-or-none process, address the question of whether preparation is switch-specific, reflect on preparation as interaction of cue encoding and memory retrieval, and discuss the impact of verbal mediation on preparation. In the 3rd part, we turn to interference phenomena in task switching. We consider proactive interference of tasks and inhibition of recently performed tasks indicated by asymmetrical switch costs and n-2 task-repetition costs. We discuss stimulus-based interference as a result of stimulus-based response activation and stimulus-based task activation, and response-based interference because of applying bivalent rather than univalent responses, response repetition effects, and carryover of response selection and execution. In the 4th and final part, we mention possible future research fields.
Word frequency is the most important variable in language research. However, despite the growing interest in the Chinese language, there are only a few sources of word frequency measures available to researchers, and the quality is less than what researchers in other languages are used to.
Following recent work by New, Brysbaert, and colleagues in English, French and Dutch, we assembled a database of word and character frequencies based on a corpus of film and television subtitles (46.8 million characters, 33.5 million words). In line with what has been found in the other languages, the new word and character frequencies explain significantly more of the variance in Chinese word naming and lexical decision performance than measures based on written texts.
Our results confirm that word frequencies based on subtitles are a good estimate of daily language exposure and capture much of the variance in word processing efficiency. In addition, our database is the first to include information about the contextual diversity of the words and to provide good frequency estimates for multi-character words and the different syntactic roles in which the words are used. The word frequencies are freely available for research purposes.
We used language-defined response sets (digit names from 1 to 9 in different languages) to explore inhibitory processes in language switching. Subjects were required to switch between two (Experiment 1) or among three (Experiment 2) languages. In Experiment 1, we obtained a shift cost when subjects switched between their first and second language, between their first and third language, or between their second and third language. For each language pairing, the shift cost was larger for the relatively dominant language than for the nondominant language (i.e., asymmetric shift cost). In Experiment 2, we assessed inhibition of response sets as reflected in n-2 repetition cost (i.e., the difference between ABA and CBA language sequences). We discuss both effects with respect to inhibitory processes in language switching. The results suggest different functional characteristics of the processes underlying asymmetric shift cost and n-2 repetition cost.
The "hard problem" in bilingual lexical access arises when translation-equivalent lexical representations are activated to roughly equal levels and, thus, compete equally for lexical selection. The language suppression hypothesis (D. W. Green, 1998) solves this hard problem through the suppression of lexical representations in the nontarget language. Following from this proposal is the prediction that lexical selection should take longer on a language switch trial because the to-be-selected representation was just suppressed on the previous trial. Inconsistent with this prediction, participants took no longer to name pictures in their dominant language on language switch trials than they did on nonswitch trials. These findings indicate that nontarget lexical representations are not suppressed. The authors suggest that these results undermine the viability of the language suppression hypothesis as a possible solution to the hard problem in bilingual lexical access.
Linear mixed-effects models (LMEMs) have become increasingly prominent in psycholin-guistics and related areas. However, many researchers do not seem to appreciate how random effects structures affect the generalizability of an analysis. Here, we argue that researchers using LMEMs for confirmatory hypothesis testing should minimally adhere to the standards that have been in place for many decades. Through theoretical arguments and Monte Carlo simulation, we show that LMEMs generalize best when they include the maximal random effects structure justified by the design. The generalization performance of LMEMs including data-driven random effects structures strongly depends upon modeling criteria and sample size, yielding reasonable results on moderately-sized samples when conservative criteria are used, but with little or no power advantage over maximal models. Finally, random-intercepts-only LMEMs used on within-subjects and/or within-items data from populations where subjects and/or items vary in their sensitivity to experimental manipulations always generalize worse than separate F 1 and F 2 tests, and in many cases, even worse than F 1 alone. Maximal LMEMs should be the 'gold standard' for confirmatory hypothesis testing in psycholinguistics and beyond.
Previous research on bilingual language switching costs has demonstrated asymmetrical switch costs, driven primarily by language dominance, such that switches into a more dominant language incur significantly greater reaction time delays than switches into a less dominant language. While such studies have generally relied on a fixed ratio of switch to nonswitch tokens, it is clear that bilinguals operate not in a fixed ratio, but along a naturally occurring bilingual continuum of modes or contexts. Bridging the concepts of language switching and language context, the current study examines language switching costs through a cued picture-naming study with variable contexts or modes. The results demonstrate that switch costs are dependent upon both language dominance and language context, with asymmetrical costs found in more monolingual modes and symmetrical costs found in bilingual modes. Implications are discussed with respect to language mode and gradient inhibitory mechanisms of language selection.
Meuter and Allport (1999) were among the first to implicate an inhibitory mechanism in bilingual language control. In their study, bilinguals took longer to name a number in the L1 directly following an L2 naming trial than to name a number in the L2 following an L1 naming trial, suggesting that bilinguals suppress the more dominant L1 during L2 production. Since then, asymmetric switch costs have not been replicated in all subsequent studies, and some have questioned whether switch costs necessarily reveal language inhibition. Based on methodological grounds and interpretability problems, we conclude that switch costs may not be the most reliable index of inhibition in bilingual language control. We review alternative proposals for the source of switch costs, and point to other indices of inhibition within the switching paradigm and from adapted paradigms.
Many theories of bilingual language production assume that when bilinguals process words in their first language, representations from their second language are coactivated. Verhoef, Roelofs, and Chwilla (2009) proposed an alternative account, assuming that the activation of second language representations is highly limited during first language production. Using a cued language-switching task, Verhoef et al. showed that allowing participants to prepare their responses failed to facilitate first language production in some contexts. Verhoef et al. argued that this reflected a lack of coactivation of second language representations in these contexts. We report two experiments with different bilingual populations that failed to confirm the predictions of this account: Preparation consistently facilitated first language production in all contexts. This suggests that in the cued switch paradigm, both first language and second language representations are consistently activated during first language production.
Readers of Japanese must constantly switch between decoding two types of script, Kana and Kanji. Does this incur a measurable processing cost? In four discrete-trial reaction time experiments, with an inter-trial interval of 1s or 2s, Japanese readers had to switch predictably, every second trial, between reading words in Kanji and Kana (Hiragana in three experiments, Katakana in the fourth). The task was naming in two experiments, and semantic categorisation in two. In every case performance was significantly slower, by about 13 ms on average, and less accurate, on the trials following a change of script. In these and three further experiments we show that the cost does not arise from changes in spatial extent, number of characters, or the familiarity of words written in the two scripts, that neither the task nor the direction of switching have much impact on the cost, and that there is no cost for switching between naming words in the two Kana scripts, Hiragana and Katakana. We conclude that to decode Kana and Kanji draws on somewhat different resources, and speculate on the source of the switch cost.
In an experimental study of language switching and selection, bilinguals named numerals in either their first or second language unpredictably. Response latencies (RTs) on switch trials (where the response language changed from the previous trial) were slower than on nonswitch trials. As predicted, the language-switching cost was consistently larger when switching to the dominant L₁ from the weaker L₂ than vice versa such that, on switch trials, L₁ responses were slower than in L₂. This "paradoxical" asymmetry in the cost of switching languages is explained in terms of differences in relative strength of the bilingual's two languages and the involuntary persistence of the previous language set across an intended switch of language. Naming in the weaker language, L₂, requires active inhibition or suppression of the stronger competitor language, L₁; the inhibition persists into the following (switch) trial in the form of "negative priming" of the L₁ lexicon as a whole. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2012 APA, all rights reserved)
Two experiments investigated whether lexical retrieval for speaking can be characterized as a competitive process by assessing the effects of semantic context on picture and word naming in German. In Experiment 1 we demonstrated that pictures are named slower in the context of same-category items than in the context of items from various semantic categories, replicating findings by Kroll and Stewart (Journal of Memory and Language, 33 (1994) 149). In Experiment 2 we used words instead of pictures. Participants either named the words in the context of same- or different-category items, or produced the words together with their corresponding determiner. While in the former condition words were named faster in the context of same-category items than of different-category items, the opposite pattern was obtained for the latter condition. These findings confirm the claim that the interfering effect of semantic context reflects competition in the retrieval of lexical entries in speaking.
Data Analysis Using Regression and Multilevel/Hierarchical Models, first published in 2007, is a comprehensive manual for the applied researcher who wants to perform data analysis using linear and nonlinear regression and multilevel models. The book introduces a wide variety of models, whilst at the same time instructing the reader in how to fit these models using available software packages. The book illustrates the concepts by working through scores of real data examples that have arisen from the authors' own applied research, with programming codes provided for each one. Topics covered include causal inference, including regression, poststratification, matching, regression discontinuity, and instrumental variables, as well as multilevel logistic regression and missing-data imputation. Practical tips regarding building, fitting, and understanding are provided throughout.
In two experiments, Greek-English bilinguals alternated between performing a lexical decision task in Greek and in English. The cost to performance on switch trials interacted with response repetition, implying that a source of this "switch cost" is at the level of response mapping or initiation. Orthographic specificity also affected switch cost. Greek and English have partially overlapping alphabets, which enabled us to manipulate language specificity at the letter level, rather than only at the level of letter clusters. Language-nonspecific stimuli used only symbols common to both Greek and English, whereas language-specific stimuli contained letters unique to just one language. The switch cost was markedly reduced by such language-specific orthography, and this effect did not interact with the effect of response repetition, implying a separate, stimulus-sensitive source of switch costs. However, we argue that this second source is not within the word-recognition system, but at the level of task schemas, because the reduction of switch cost with language-specific stimuli was abolished when these stimuli were intermingled with language-nonspecific stimuli.
Bilinguals are faster to name a picture in one language when the picture's name is a cognate in the other language. We asked whether cognate facilitation in picture naming would be obtained for bilinguals whose two languages differ in script. Spanish-English and Japanese-English bilinguals named cognate and noncognate pictures in English, their second language (L2). Cognate facilitation was observed for both groups. The results suggest that there is cross-language activation of phonology even for different-script bilinguals.
Under review). Parsimonious mixed models
- D Bates
- R Kliegl
- S Vasishth
- H Baayen
Bates, D., Kliegl, R., Vasishth, S., & Baayen, H. (Under
review). Parsimonious mixed models. Retrieved from
June 16, 2015 http://arxiv.org/abs/1506.04967v1.
Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression
- M Finkbeiner
- J Almeida
- N Janssen
- A Carramaza
Finkbeiner, M., Almeida, J., Janssen, N., & Carramaza, A.
(2006). Lexical selection in bilingual speech production
does not involve language suppression. Journal of
Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and
Cognition, 32(5), 1075-1089.