Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T06:52:24.089Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Bilinguals as “experts”? Comparing performance of mono- to bilingual individuals via a mousetracking paradigm

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 August 2018

MARKUS F. DAMIAN ,
WENTING YE ,
MINAH OH  and
SIAN YANG
MARKUS F. DAMIAN*
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
WENTING YE
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
MINAH OH
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
SIAN YANG
Affiliation:
University of Bristol, United Kingdom
*
Address for correspondence: Markus F. Damian, University of Bristol, School of Experimental Psychology, 12a Priory Road, Room 3D9, Bristol BS8 1TU, United Kingdomm.damian@bristol.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The question of whether bilingualism conveys a broader advantage in executive functions has recently been controversially discussed, with the empirical findings presenting a complex pattern of positive and null results. Here we present results from three standard tasks measuring executive functions (Flanker; Simon; Spatial Stroop) in which we compared performance of English monolingual to Chinese–English bilingual young adults. Participants provided responses via movement of a computer mouse rather than the conventional key presses, which provides a rich signal of the unfolding response dynamics. Clear differences between bi- and monolinguals emerged, with the former providing more ‘efficient’ responses than the latter. Results are discussed regarding the extent to which these results can be characterised as a genuine “bilingual advantage”.

Keywords

BilingualismExecutive functionsMouse trackingSimon taskFlanker taskSpatial Stroop task
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 22 , Issue 5 , November 2019 , pp. 1176 - 1193
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

We thank Chris Kent and Chris Moreno-Stokoe for valuable comments on this manuscript.

Supplementary material can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000901

References

Abney, D. H., McBride, D. M., Conte, A. M., & Vinson, D. W. (2015). Response dynamics in prospective memory. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1020–1028.Google Scholar
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Breugelmans, S. M., Chasiotis, A., & Sam, D. L. (2011). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2006). Effect of bilingualism and computer video game experience on the Simon task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 60, 68–79.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2017). The bilingual adaptation: How minds accommodate experience. Psychological Bulletin, 143, 233–262.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Martin, M. M. (2004). Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task. Developmental Science, 7, 325–339.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290–302.Google Scholar
Brown, S., & Heathcote, A. (2003). QMLE: Fast, robust, and efficient estimation of distribution functions based on quantiles. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35, 485–492.Google Scholar
Calvo, N., Ibáñez, A., & García, A. M. (2016). The impact of bilingualism on working memory: a null effect on the whole may not be so on the parts. Frontiers in Psychology, 7.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Hernandez, M., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2008). Bilingualism aids conflict resolution: evidence from the ANT task. Cognition, 106, 59–86.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Hernández, M., Costa-Faidella, J., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2009). On the bilingual advantage in conflict processing: Now you see it, now you don't. Cognition, 113 (2), 135–149.Google Scholar
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.Google Scholar
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon identification of a target letter in a search task. Perception & Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.Google Scholar
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2009). Motions of the hand expose the partial and parallel activation of stereotypes. Psychological Science, 20, 1183–1188.Google Scholar
Freeman, J. B., & Ambady, N. (2010). MouseTracker: Software for studying real-time mental processing using a computer mouse-tracking method. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 226–241.Google Scholar
Freeman, J. B., Dale, R., & Farmer, T. A. (2011). Hand in motion reveals mind in motion. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 59.Google Scholar
Gold, B. T., Kim, C., Johnson, N. F., Kryscio, R. J., & Smith, C. D. (2013). Lifelong bilingualism maintains neural efficiency for cognitive control in aging. Journal of Neuroscience, 33, 387–396.Google Scholar
Harrison, T. L., Shipstead, Z., Hicks, K. L., Hambrick, D. Z., Redick, T. S., & Engle, R. W. (2013). Working memory training may increase working memory capacity but not fluid intelligence. Psychological Science, 24, 2409– 2419.Google Scholar
Heathcote, A., Popiel, S. J., & Mewhort, D. J. (1991). Analysis of response time distributions: An example using the Stroop task. Psychological Bulletin, 109 (2), 340–347.Google Scholar
Heathcote, A., Brown, S., & Cousineau, D. (2004). QMPE: Estimating Lognormal, Wald, and Weibull RT distributions with a parameter-dependent lower bound. Behavior Research Methods, 36, 277–290.Google Scholar
Hilchey, M. D., & Klein, R. M. (2011). Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18, 625–658.Google Scholar
Hofstede, G. (2001). Culture's consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Incera, S., & McLennan, C. T. (2016). Mouse tracking reveals that bilinguals behave like experts. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 610–620.Google Scholar
Incera, S., & McLennan, C. T. (2017). Bilingualism and age are continuous variables that influence executive function. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 1–21.Google Scholar
Lau, L. Y., & Ranyard, R. (2005). Chinese and English probabilistic thinking and risk taking in gambling. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 36, 621–627.Google Scholar
Lepora, N. F., & Pezzulo, G. (2015). Embodied choice: how action influences perceptual decision making. PLoS Computational Biology, 11 (4), e1004110.Google Scholar
Martin-Rhee, M. M., & Bialystok, E. (2008). The development of two types of inhibitory control in monolingual and bilingual children. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 81–93.Google Scholar
McKinstry, C., Dale, R., & Spivey, M. J. (2008). Action dynamics reveal parallel competition in decision making. Psychological Science, 19, 22–24.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., & Friedman, N. P. (2012). The nature and organization of individual differences in executive functions: Four general conclusions. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 21, 814–819.Google Scholar
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex ‘‘frontal lobe’’ tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41, 49–100.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R. (2014). The role of componential analysis, categorical hypothesising, replicability and confirmation bias in testing for bilingual advantages in executive functioning. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 26, 242– 255.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R. (2015). Do many hones dull the bilingual whetstone? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 41– 42.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R., & Greenberg, Z. I. (2013). There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 232–258.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R., & Liu, Y. (2014). Conflict resolution in sentence processing is the same for bilinguals and monolinguals: The role of confirmation bias in testing for bilingual advantages. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 27, 50–74.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R., & Sawi, O. (2014). Bilingual advantages in executive functioning: problems in convergent validity, discriminant validity, and the identification of the theoretical constructs. Frontiers in Psychology, 5.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R., Johnson, H. A., & Sawi, O. (2015). Bilingual advantages in executive functioning either do not exist or are restricted to very specific and undetermined circumstances. Cortex, 69, 265–278.Google Scholar
Paap, K. R., Myuz, H. A., Anders, R. T., Bockelman, M. F., Mikulinsky, R., & Sawi, O. M. (2017). No compelling evidence for a bilingual advantage in switching or that frequent language switching reduces switch cost. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 29, 89–112.Google Scholar
Prior, A., & MacWhinney, B. (2010). A bilingual advantage in task switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 253–262.Google Scholar
Rabbitt, P. (1997). Introduction: Methodologies and models in the study of executive function. In Rabbitt, P. (Ed.), Methodology of frontal and executive function (pp. 1–38). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Silverberg, S., & Samuel, A. G. (2004). The effect of age of second language acquisition on the representation and processing of second language words. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 381–398.Google Scholar
Spivey, M. J., & Dale, R. (2004). On the continuity of mind: Toward a dynamical account of cognition. Psychology of Learning and Motivation, 45, 87–142.Google Scholar
Spivey, M. J., Richardson, D., & Dale, R. (2009). The movement of eye and hand as a window into language and cognition. In Morsella, E., Bargh, J. A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of human action (pp. 225–249). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Tomlinson, J. M., Bailey, T. M., & Bott, L. (2013). Possibly all of that and then some: Scalar implicatures are understood in two steps. Journal of Memory and Language, 69, 18–35.Google Scholar
Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (1994). Effects of truncation on reaction time analysis. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 123, 34–80.Google Scholar
Van Selst, M., & Jolicoeur, P. (1994). A solution to the effect of sample size on outlier elimination. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 47A, 631–650.Google Scholar
Zahodne, L. B., Glymour, M. M., Sparks, C., Bontempo, D., Dixon, R. A., MacDonald, S. W., & Manly, J. J. (2011). Education does not slow cognitive decline with aging: 12-year evidence from the Victoria Longitudinal Study. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 1039–1046.Google Scholar
Zhou, B., & Krott, A. (2016a). Data trimming procedure can eliminate bilingual cognitive advantage. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 23, 1221–1230.Google Scholar
Zhou, B., & Krott, A. (2016b. Bilingualism enhances attentional control in non-verbal conflict tasks–evidence from ex-Gaussian analyses. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1–19.Google Scholar
Supplementary material: PDF

Damian et al. supplementary material

Figures S1-S4

Download Damian et al. supplementary material(PDF)
PDF 670.9 KB