The impact of bilingualism on the executive control and orienting networks of attention

Hernández, Mireia; Costa, Albert; Fuentes, Luis J.; Vivas, Ana B.; Sebastián‐Gallés, Núria

doi:10.1017/s1366728909990010

Cited by 177 publications

(201 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

175

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, group differences in the ANT were found in the orienting network, running counter to results obtained with adult bilinguals in Hernández, Costa, Fuentes, Vivas, and Sebastián-Gallés (2010). It is possible that whereas all children in the current study profited from the spatial cue indicating the correct location of the following target, the bilingual and trilingual children were able to exploit the orienting cue to a significantly greater extent than the second-language learners.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Executive functions and inhibitory control in multilingual children: Evidence from second-language learners, bilinguals, and trilinguals

Poarch

Hell

2012

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

280

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 99%

Executive functions and inhibitory control in multilingual children: Evidence from second-language learners, bilinguals, and trilinguals

Poarch

Hell

2012

Journal of Experimental Child Psychology

280

231

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The relationship of an IOR paradigm to active inhibitory control processes, on the other hand, is a much more ambiguous case, given that opinions are highly divergent on the causes (Hunt & Kingstone, 2003;Klein, 2000;Souto & Kerzel, 2009) and effects (Abrams & Dobkin, 1994;Taylor & Klein, 2000) of IOR. Thus, it is difficult to discern what greater IOR for bilinguals as compared to monolinguals (Colzato et al, 2008; but see Hernández et al, 2010, for a nonreplication) might mean. On a historical note, the Colzato et al investigation, showing greater IOR in bilinguals at long cue-target intervals, concluded that this language group possesses a superior ability to maintain action goals, whereas a greater spatial negative-priming effect in bilinguals (Treccani et al, 2009) has been taken as evidence in favor of BICA.…”

Section: Overall (Global) Rt Effects: Overviewmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes

2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It has been proposed that the unique need for early bilinguals to manage multiple languages while their executive control mechanisms are developing might result in long-term cognitive advantages on inhibitory control processes that generalize beyond the language domain. We review the empirical data from the literature on nonlinguistic interference tasks to assess the validity of this proposed bilingual inhibitory control advantage. Our review of these findings reveals that the bilingual advantage on conflict resolution, which by hypothesis is mediated by inhibitory control, is sporadic at best, and in some cases conspicuously absent. A robust finding from this review is that bilinguals typically outperform monolinguals on both compatible and incompatible trials, often by similar magnitudes. Together, these findings suggest that bilinguals do enjoy a more widespread cognitive advantage (a bilingual executive processing advantage) that is likely observable on a variety of cognitive assessment tools but that, somewhat ironically, is most often not apparent on traditional assays of nonlinguistic inhibitory control processes.

show abstract

“…What is the precise role of attentional control in SLA (Rai, Loschky, Harris, Peck, & Cook, 2011)? How does bilingualism impact WM (Hernández, Costa, Fuentes, & Vivas, 2010)? And what cognitive training practices increase WM and facilitate L2 learning (Klingberg, 2010)?…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Working Memory in Second Language Acquisition

Sagarra¹

2012

The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Working memory (WM) is the temporary storage and processing of incoming information needed to execute complex cognitive actions (Baddeley, 2007), such as processing a foreign language (L2). Since the 1980s, the role of WM in fi rst language (L1) processing has been investigated extensively, but only more recently has its role in L2 learning been examined keeping in mind that adult second language acquisition (SLA) requires additional computation and activation, which in turn imposes extra load on the already limited WM resources. In particular, two memory components have been considered to play a prominent role in SLA: phonological short-term memory and WM's central executive, which is responsible for information management during processing. Our goal is to describe the theoretical underpinnings of WM's central executive, discuss tests to measure WM's central executive for L2 research, and provide a critical review of studies examining its role in L2 processing and learning. This issue is crucial for explaining individual differences in L2 learning, creating language-aptitude tests that predict L2 abilities, and implementing pedagogical practices that enhance verbal WM through trainability and compensate for WM capacity (WMC) shortcomings. Working Memory ModelsOf the numerous WM models that have emerged since the term was coined in the 1960s, the following are particularly popular within SLA circles: Just and Carpenter's domainspecifi c single-resource model, Baddeley's and Waters and Caplan's domain-specifi c multipleresource models, and the domain-free connectionist models. Domain-specifi c models claim that limitations in WMC constrain L2 learning, whereas domain-free models rely on limitations imposed by a domain-general attentional construct. In turn, single-resource models emphasize a trade-off between processing and storage, while multiple-resource models assume that processing and storage are independent from each other.Just and Carpenter's (1992) capacity theory posits that processing and storage depend on and compete for a shared pool of resources with a limited capacity that varies among individuals. Tasks that deplete a person's WMC can result in less storage and slower processing. This model differs from Baddeley's (2007) model that depicts WM as a multipleresource system formed by a central executive and three slave systems with independent limited capacities: two short-term storage systems (phonological loop, visuospatial sketchpad) dedicated to a content domain (verbal and visuospatial respectively) and an episodic buffer that relays information between long-term memory and the phonological loop and visuospatial sketchpad. The central executive coordinates the fl ow of information between its slave systems, binds information from a number of sources into coherent episodes, determines what information is selected and inhibited, and decides when to shift between tasks or retrieval strategies. This polifacetic nature has led some scholars to propose separate resources within the central executive. Fo...

show abstract

The impact of bilingualism on the executive control and orienting networks of attention

Cited by 177 publications

References 43 publications

Executive functions and inhibitory control in multilingual children: Evidence from second-language learners, bilinguals, and trilinguals

Executive functions and inhibitory control in multilingual children: Evidence from second-language learners, bilinguals, and trilinguals

Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes

Working Memory in Second Language Acquisition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About