The after-effects of bilingual language production

Branzi, Francesca M.; Martin, Clara D.; Abutalebi, Jubin; Costa, Albert

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.09.022

Cited by 83 publications

(147 citation statements)

References 41 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

134

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Several studies investigating the effect of language order in language production have shown that, presented two separate language blocks, L1 naming is hampered if preceded by L2 naming. However, this negative effect is not found in the L2, where performance seems to benefit from the previous naming in the L1 (Levy et al, 2007; Misra et al, 2012; Branzi et al, 2014). One way to interpret this asymmetry is by assuming that during L2 naming, the L1 is strongly inhibited and that the inhibitory carry-over effect hampers L1 naming in the subsequent block.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…This suggests that the pattern of results, namely symmetrical switching costs and paradoxical language dominance, found in the present study can be confidently attributed to the task itself together with the high proficiency reached in the L2 and less so by the fact that the weaker language might have benefited more than the stronger language from prior practice. Regardless, further studies are needed to assess the effect of practice on language control (see also Branzi et al, 2014; Declerck and Philipp, 2017). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Bilingual Language Switching: Production vs. Recognition

Mosca

Bot

2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aims at assessing how bilinguals select words in the appropriate language in production and recognition while minimizing interference from the non-appropriate language. Two prominent models are considered which assume that when one language is in use, the other is suppressed. The Inhibitory Control (IC) model suggests that, in both production and recognition, the amount of inhibition on the non-target language is greater for the stronger compared to the weaker language. In contrast, the Bilingual Interactive Activation (BIA) model proposes that, in language recognition, the amount of inhibition on the weaker language is stronger than otherwise. To investigate whether bilingual language production and recognition can be accounted for by a single model of bilingual processing, we tested a group of native speakers of Dutch (L1), advanced speakers of English (L2) in a bilingual recognition and production task. Specifically, language switching costs were measured while participants performed a lexical decision (recognition) and a picture naming (production) task involving language switching. Results suggest that while in language recognition the amount of inhibition applied to the non-appropriate language increases along with its dominance as predicted by the IC model, in production the amount of inhibition applied to the non-relevant language is not related to language dominance, but rather it may be modulated by speakers' unconscious strategies to foster the weaker language. This difference indicates that bilingual language recognition and production might rely on different processing mechanisms and cannot be accounted within one of the existing models of bilingual language processing.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bilingual Language Switching: Production vs. Recognition

Mosca

Bot

2017

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The issue of how bilingual speakers manage to restrict lexicalization to one of their languages, while preventing massive interference from their other language, has prompted a great amount of research in the last decades (e.g., Costa & Santesteban, 2004;Costa, Santesteban & Ivanova, 2006;Jackson, Swainson, Cunnington, & Jackson, 2001;Christoffels, Firk, & Schiller, 2007;Misra, Guo, Bobb, & Kroll, 2012;Branzi, Martin, Abutalebi & Costa, 2014;Branzi, Della Rosa, Canini, Costa & Abutalebi, 2015; for a review see Baus, Branzi & Costa, 2015). As a result of this research, there is agreement in assuming that the bilingual language control (bLC) system makes use of various processes of the domain-general executive control (EC) system (e.g., Abutalebi & Green, 2007).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

On the overlap between bilingual language control and domain-general executive control

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We explored the overlap between bilingual language control (bLC) and domain-general executive control (EC) by focusing on inhibitory control processes. We tested 62 bilinguals in linguistic and non-linguistic switching tasks for two types of costs, such as the n-1 shift cost and the n-2 repetition cost. In order to explore the involvement of inhibitory control in bLC and EC, we assessed the pattern of switch costs in the two tasks and then we correlated them between tasks. Results showed reduced n-2 repetition costs as compared to n-1 shift costs in the linguistic task only, suggesting that small amount of inhibition were deployed when switching between languages. Importantly, neither the n-1 shift costs nor the n-2 repetition costs were correlated between tasks. These results, supported by additional evidence from the ex-Gaussian analysis, suggest that inhibitory control is differently involved in bLC and in EC.

show abstract

“…This makes language switching a double‐edged sword: One the one hand, it is more ecological and makes greater use of the learner's linguistic resources, but on the other hand, it is likely to induce a cognitive cost in both perception and production (see Gullifer, Kroll, & Dussias, , for a review). When bilinguals are asked to switch between languages while speaking, each language switch is accompanied by an increase in the time required to start speaking and by greater chances of making errors as compared to the nonswitching conditions (see, among many others, Costa & Santesteban, ; see also Branzi, Martin, Abutalebi, & Costa, ; Verhoef, Roelofs, & Chwilla, , for electrophysiological and neuroimaging data). Similarly, when bilinguals are presented with written input that involves language switches, they typically display longer recognition times and larger electrophysiological effects for switch as compared to nonswitch trials (e.g., Macizo, Bajo, & Paolieri, ; Van der Meij, Cuetos, Carreiras, & Barber, ), even when switches are not perceived consciously, as is the case in masked priming experiment (e.g., Casaponsa, Carreiras, & Duñabeitia, ; Chauncey, Grainger, & Holcomb, ; Duñabeitia, Dimitropoulou, Uribe‐Etxebarria, Laka, & Carreiras, ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing Bilingual Educational Methods: A Plea to End the Language‐Mixing Taboo

Antón

Thierry

Goborov³

et al. 2016

Language Learning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Language mixing in a given class is often avoided in bilingual education because of the generally held belief that one subject should be taught in only one language and one person should stick to one language in order to minimize confusion. Here, we compared the effects of mixing two languages and monolingual functioning on memory performance in immediate recall as a proxy for comprehension and attention during learning. In Experiment 1, nonbalanced bilingual youngsters were provided with definition pairs introducing familiar objects in a single‐language context (SLC) or in a mixed‐language context (MLC). After each definition block, participants were asked to identify previously introduced objects presented among a stream of Old and New items. In Experiment 2, the same speaker produced the two definitions in the mixed‐language context, thus violating the second principle introduced above. In both experiments we found no advantage for the SLC over the MLC of exposure.

show abstract

The after-effects of bilingual language production

Cited by 83 publications

References 41 publications

Bilingual Language Switching: Production vs. Recognition

Bilingual Language Switching: Production vs. Recognition

On the overlap between bilingual language control and domain-general executive control

Testing Bilingual Educational Methods: A Plea to End the Language‐Mixing Taboo

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About