Switching between spoken language-production tasks: the role of attentional inhibition and enhancement

Executive control in bilingual aphasia: a systematic review

“…Nine studies used the Stroop task (Stroop, 1935), in which a deficit is typically operationalized as the relative difference in reaction time (RT) or accuracy between congruent and incongruent conditions (e.g., say “red” to the red ink color of the word red or green , respectively). The Stroop task is taken to be a measure of prepotent response inhibition, a component of inhibition that involves the ability to suppress dominant or automatic responses (Friedman & Miyake, 2004; Miyake et al, 2000a; but see Roelofs, 2021; Shao, Roelofs, Martin & Meyer, 2015; Sikora & Roelofs, 2018, for evidence against this interpretation).…”

Attentional control in interpreting: A model of language control and processing control

“…First, although we cannot dismiss inhibition in bilingual control as we did in interpreting control (because of the language-modality connections), the concept of inhibition may not be as critical to bilingual control as hypothesized in the Inhibitory Control Model (Green, 1998) or BIA+ model (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002). In section 2.3 where we argued for the view that inhibition does not capture very well the essence of language control in interpreting, many of the arguments are in fact from research on general bilingual control (Li, 1998; Yeung & Monsell, 2003; Grundy et al, 2017；Sikora & Roelofs, 2018; Dijkstra et al, 2018). “Target enhancement” (Sikora & Roelofs, 2018; or “task engagement” in Green & Abutalebi, 2013) and “task disengagement” (Green & Abutalebi, 2013; Grundy et al, 2017) have been proposed to account for empirical findings that were originally accounted for by “inhibition” (or “nontarget inhibition”).…”

“…In section 2.3 where we argued for the view that inhibition does not capture very well the essence of language control in interpreting, many of the arguments are in fact from research on general bilingual control (Li, 1998;Yeung & Monsell, 2003;Grundy et al, 2017；Sikora & Roelofs, 2018Dijkstra et al, 2018). "Target enhancement" (Sikora & Roelofs, 2018; or "task engagement" in Green & Abutalebi, 2013) and "task disengagement" (Green & Abutalebi, 2013;Grundy et al, 2017) have been proposed to account for empirical findings that were originally accounted for by "inhibition" (or "nontarget inhibition"). Specifically, in a language-switching naming task, to achieve adequate processing in the weaker L2, one has to focus on it and enhance its activation, which would then require more processing time to get disengaged from it, leading to more time to switch to L1 than the other way around.…”

“…In recent years, the inhibition account has received more attention in the bilingualism literature due to the Inhibitory Control model (Green, 1998) and the BIA+ model (Dijkstra & Van Heuven, 2002). However, inhibition and enhancement may involve separate mechanisms: Sikora and Roelofs (2018) compared participants’ switching performance in an oral noun-phrase production task and a color-word Stroop task, and found that switching between long and short spoken noun-phrase production involved inhibition while switching between color naming and word reading involved enhancement, suggesting that the issue of inhibition versus enhancement may be task-dependent. In Dijkstra et al’s (Dijkstra, Wahl, Buytenhuijs, Van Halem, Al-Jibouri, De Korte & Rekké, 2018) new computational model Multilink, there was not a role for inhibition, and Multilink is more consistent with empirical data than is the BIA+ model, including data from bilingual lexical decision, word naming, and forward and backward translation tasks.…”

Are similar control processes implemented during single and dual language production? Evidence from switching between speech registers and languages

“…A multitude of studies have shown that control processes, measured with the switching task, are implemented during both single (e.g., Finkbeiner, Almeida, Janssen & Caramazza, 2006; Sikora & Roelofs, 2018; Yeung & Monsell, 2003) and dual (e.g., Bonfieni, Branigan, Pickering & Sorace, 2019; Costa, Santesteban & Ivanova, 2006; Meuter & Allport, 1999) language production. However, few studies have directly compared control processes in a single and dual language context (Abutalebi, Annoni, Zimine, Pegna, Seghier, Lee-Jahnke, Lazeyras, Cappa & Khateb, 2008; Declerck et al, 2017b; for comparisons of different types of bilingual language control, see also Dias, Villameriel, Giezen, Costello & Carreiras, 2017; Kirk, Kempe, Scott-Brown, Philipp & Declerck, 2018).…”