Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-lj6df Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:21:17.719Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The relationship between general executive functions and bilingual switching and monitoring in language production

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 June 2017

JUSSI JYLKKÄ ,
MINNA LEHTONEN ,
FRED LINDHOLM ,
ANNA KUUSAKOSKI  and
MATTI LAINE
JUSSI JYLKKÄ*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University, Finland
MINNA LEHTONEN
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University, Finland Department of Psychology and Logopedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Finland
FRED LINDHOLM
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University, Finland
ANNA KUUSAKOSKI
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University, Finland
MATTI LAINE
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University, Finland Turku Brain and Mind Centre, University of Turku, Finland
*
Address for correspondence: Jussi Jylkkä, Department of Psychology, Abo Akademi University, Fabriksgatan 2, 20500 Åbo, Finlandjjylkka@abo.fi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We examined the role of general inhibitory control and general set shifting processes in bilingual language production in 51 native Finnish speakers with English as L2, mainly learnt after the age of 7. We tested the hypothesis that inhibitory control, measured with the Simon and Flanker tasks, is central when switching into L1 (Green, 1998) and, more generally, that general set shifting processes, measured with the Number-Letter task, underlie language switching and mixing (Meuter & Allport, 1999). The results were inconsistent. The basic language switch cost effects were in line with the inhibitory control model, but the interactions with the executive tasks did not support the model and were partly contrary to it. The general set shifting hypothesis received some support. Alternative explanations of the sources of the switching and mixing cost asymmetries in bilingual language production are discussed.

Keywords

language switchinglanguage mixingasymmetric switching costasymmetric mixing costinhibitory control model
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 21 , Issue 3 , May 2018 , pp. 505 - 522
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

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

*This study was supported by project grants from Emil Aaltonen Foundation and Helsinki University 3-year Funds, as well as an Academy of Finland grant (grant # 288880) to the second author. The last author was supported by grants from the Academy of Finland (project #260276) and the Åbo Akademi University Endowment (the BrainTrain project). We thank Teemu Laine for developing the script for the reaction time analysis and Juhani Virta for assistance in the preparation of the experiment and testing. Finally, we thank Henri Olkoniemi for help with linear mixed models.

References

Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., Walker, S., Christensen, R. H. B., Singmann, H., Dai, B., & Grothendieck, G. (2015). Lme4 (1.1-9). Linear mixed-effects models using ‘Eigen’ and S4. http://crantastic.org/packages/lme4/versions/42873.Google Scholar
Bexkens, A., van den Wildenberg, W. P. M., & Tijms, J. (2014). Rapid automatized naming in children with dyslexia: Is inhibitory control involved? Dyslexia 21, 212–234.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E. (2011). Reshaping the mind: The benefits of bilingualism. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 65, 229–235.Google Scholar
Bobb, S. C., & Wodniecka, Z. (2013). Language switching in picture naming: What asymmetric switch costs (do not) tell us about inhibition in bilingual speech planning. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 568–585.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., Firk, C., & Schiller, N. O. (2007). Bilingual language control: An event-related brain potential study. Brain Research, 1147, 192–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Christoffels, I. K., Ganushchak, L., & La Heij, W. (2016). When L1 suffers: Sustained, global slowing and the reversed language effect in mixed language context. In Schwieter, J. W. (Ed.), Cognitive Control and Consequences of Multilingualism (171–192). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
Costa, A., & Santesteban, M. (2004). Lexical access in bilingual speech production: Evidence from language switching in highly proficient bilinguals and L2 learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 491–511.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Hernández, M., & Sebastián-Gallés, N. (2008). Bilingualism aids conflict resolution: Evidence from the ANT task. Cognition, 106, 59–86.Google Scholar
de Groot, A. M. B. (2011). Language and Cognition in Bilinguals and Multilinguals. New York, NY: Psychology Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, M., & Philipp, A. M. (2015). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1630–1645.Google Scholar
Declerck, M., Koch, I., & Philipp, A. M. (2012). Digits vs. Pictures: The influence of stimulus type on language switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 896–904.Google Scholar
Dijkstra, T., van Heuven, W. J. B., & Grainger, J. (1998). Simulating cross-language competition with the bilingual interactive activation model. Psychologica Belgica, 38, 177–196.Google Scholar
Eriksen, B. A., & Eriksen, C. W. (1974). Effects of noise letters upon the identification of a target letter in a nonsearch task. Perception and Psychophysics, 16, 143–149.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., & Ferreira, V. S. (2009). Should I stay or should I switch? A cost-benefit analysis of voluntary language switching in young and aging bilinguals. Journal of Expermental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 640–665.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Kleinman, D., & Wierenga, C. E. (2014). What's easier: Doing what you want, or being told what to do? Cued versus voluntary language and task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 2167–2195.Google Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81.Google Scholar
Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J. (2013). Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 515–530.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hernandez, A. E., & Kohnert, K. J. (1999). Aging and language switching in bilinguals. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 6, 69–83.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
Jackson, G. M., Swainson, R., Cunnington, R., & Jackson, S. R. (2001). ERP correlates of executive control during repeated language switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 169–178.Google Scholar
Jylkkä, J., Soveri, A., Wahlström, J., Lehtonen, M., Rodríguez-Fornells, A., & Laine, M. (2017). Relationship between language switching experience and executive functions in bilinguals: an Internet-based study. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 1–16.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Schwieter, J. W., & Sunderman, G. (2012). Inhibitory control predicts language switching performance in trilingual speech production. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 651–662.Google Scholar
Liu, H., Fan, N., Rossi, S., Yao, P., & Chen, B. (2016). The effect of cognitive flexibility on task switching and language switching. International Journal of Bilingualism, 20, 563–579.Google Scholar
Liu, H., Rossi, S., Zhou, H., & Chen, B. (2014). Electrophysiological evidence for domain-general inhibitory control during bilingual language switching. PLOS ONE, 9, e110887.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meuter, R., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40.Google Scholar
Misra, M., Guo, T., Bobb, S. C., & Kroll, J. F. (2012). When bilinguals choose a single word to speak: Electrophysiological evidence for inhibition of the native language. Journal of Memory and Language, 67, 224–237.Google Scholar
Philipp, A. M., Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Inhibitory processes in language switching? Evidence from switching language-defined response sets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 395–416.Google Scholar
Prior, A., & Gollan, T. (2011). Good language-switchers are good task-switchers: Evidence from Spanish-English and Mandarin-English bilinguals. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 682–691.Google Scholar
Rodriguez-Fornells, A., Krämer, U. M., Lorenzo-Seva, U., Festman, J., & Münte, T. F. (2012). Self-assessment of individual differences in language switching. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 1–15.Google Scholar
Rogers, R. D., & Monsell, S. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231.Google Scholar
Schwieter, J. W., & Sunderman, G. (2008). Language switching in bilingual speech production: In search of the language-specific selection mechanism. Mental Lexicon, 3, 214–238.Google Scholar
Simon, J. R., & Rudell, A. P. (1967). Auditory S-R compatibility: The effect of an irrelevant cue on information processing. Journal of Applied Psychology, 51, 300–304.Google Scholar
Verhoef, K. M. W., Roelofs, A., & Chwilla, D. J. (2009). Role of inhibition in language switching: Evidence from event-related brain potentials in overt picture naming. Cognition, 110, 84–99.Google Scholar