The neural mechanism for the dyadic process of teaching is poorly understood. Although theories about teaching have proposed that before any teaching takes place, the teacher will predict the knowledge state of the student(s) to enhance the teaching outcome, this theoretical Prediction-Transmission hypothesis has not been tested with any neuroimaging studies. Using functional near-infrared spectroscopy-based hyperscanning, this study measured brain activities of the teacher-student pairs simultaneously. Results showed that better teaching outcome was associated with higher time-lagged interpersonal neural synchronization (INS) between right temporal-parietal junction (TPJ) of the teacher and anterior superior temporal cortex (aSTC) of the student, when the teacher's brain activity preceded that of the student. Moreover, time course analyses suggested that such INS could mark the quality of the teaching outcome at an early stage of the teaching process. These results provided key neural evidence for the Prediction-Transmission hypothesis about teaching, and suggested that the INS plays an important role in the successful teaching.
Four experiments with Chinese-English bilinguals were conducted in order to investigate the hypothesis of language nonselective access to an integrated lexicon for bilingual phonological representations. Results of a naming task (in Experiments 1 and 2) and a lexical decision task (in Experiments 3 and 4) showed homophone priming effects regardless of priming direction (English to Chinese, or Chinese to English) or English proficiency. Our findings are compatible with the BIA+ model of bilingual processing, provide further support for the hypothesis of language nonselective access to an integrated lexicon for bilingual phonological representations, and extend the hypothesis to language pairs with very different writing systems.
This paper presents an experiment that explored the role of domain–general inhibitory control on language switching. Reaction times (RTs) and event–related brain potentials (ERPs) were recorded when low–proficient bilinguals with high and low inhibitory control (IC) switched between overt picture naming in both their L1 and L2. Results showed that the language switch costs of bilinguals with high–IC were symmetrical, while that of bilinguals with low–IC were not. The N2 component failed to show a significant interaction between group, language and task, indicating that inhibition may not comes into play during the language task schema competition phase. The late positive component (LPC), however, showed larger amplitudes for L2 repeat and switch trials than for L1 trials in the high–IC group, indicating that inhibition may play a key role during the lexical response selection phase. These findings suggest that domain–general inhibitory control plays an important role in modulating language switch costs and its influence can be specified in lexical selection phase.
This article presents two experiments employing two structural priming paradigms that investigated whether cross-linguistic syntactic priming occurred in Chinese and English passive sentences that differ in word order (production-to-production priming in Experiment 1 and comprehension-to-production priming in Experiment 2). Results revealed that cross-linguistic syntactic priming occurred in Chinese and English passive sentences, regardless of production of primes or comprehension of primes and language direction (L1–L2 or L2–L1). Our findings indicate that word-order similarity between languages is not necessary for cross-linguistic structural priming, supporting the view of a two-stage model of language production.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.