Two experiments are reported in which monolingual and bilingual participants who were younger (Experiment 1) or older (Experiment 2) adults performed in a dual-task classification paradigm. Visually (primary task) and auditorily (secondary task) presented stimuli were classified into two categories. The stimuli belonged to two domains, letters or numbers (LN) and animals or musical instruments (AM), and the two task modalities used stimuli from the same (related) or opposite (unrelated) domains. For both age groups, bilinguals were less disrupted than monolinguals in visual sorting in the LN domain, and relatedness affected performance only in the AM domain. The results indicate different processing demands for the two domains, with the simpler domain (LN) favouring bilinguals and the more semantically complex domain (AM) favouring related judgements for the two task modalities.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
AndersonN. D.CraikF. I. M.Naveh-BenjaminM. (1998). The attentional demands of encoding and retrieval in younger and older adults: I. Evidence from divided attention costs.Psychology and Aging13, 405–423.
2.
BialystokE. (1986). Factors in the growth of linguistic awareness.Child Development57, 498–510.
3.
BialystokE. (1999). Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual mind.Child Development70, 636–644.
4.
BialystokE.CoddJ. (1997). Cardinal limits: Evidence from language awareness and bilingualism for developing concepts of number.Cognitive Development12, 85–106.
5.
BialystokE.CraikF. I. M.KleinR.ViswanathanM. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task.Psychology and Aging19, 290–303.
6.
BialystokE.MajumderS. (1998). The relationship between bilingualism and the development of cognitive processes in problem solving.Applied Psycholinguistics19, 69–85.
7.
BialystokE.MartinM. M. (2004). Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task.Developmental Science7, 325–339.
8.
BialystokE.SenmanL. (2004). Executive processes in appearance-reality tasks: The role of inhibition of attention and symbolic representation.Child Development75, 562–579.
9.
CattellR. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment.Journal of Educational Psychology54, 1–22.
10.
CattellR. B.CattellA. K. S. (1960). Handbook for the individual or group culture fair intelligence testChampaign, IL: IPAT.
11.
ChenH.-C.HoC. (1986). Development of Stroop interference in Chinese–English bilinguals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition12, 397–401.
12.
ConnellyS. L.HasherL.ZacksR. T. (1991). Age and reading: The impact of distraction.Psychology and Aging6, 533–541.
13.
CraikF. I. M. (1977). Age differences in human memory.Handbook of the psychology of aging.BirrenJ. E.SchaieK. W.New York: Van Nostrand and Reinhold.
14.
CromdalJ. (1999). Childhood bilingualism and metalinguistic skills: Analysis and control in young Swedish–English bilinguals.Applied Psycholinguistics20, 1–20.
15.
DijkstraT.GraingerJ.Van HeuvenW. (1999). Recognition of cognates and interlingual homographs: The neglected role of phonology.Journal of Memory and Language41, 496–518.
16.
DulaneyC. L.RogersW. A. (1994). Mechanisms underlying reduction in Stroop interference with practice for young and old adults. Journal of.Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition20, 470–484.
17.
DunnL. M.DunnL. M. (1997). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, examiner's manual. (3rd ed.). Pines Circle, MN: American Guidance Service.
18.
FriesenC. K.KingstoneA. (1998). The eyes have it! Reflexive orienting is triggered by nonpredictive gaze.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review5, 490–495.
19.
GollanT. H.AcenasL.-A. R. (2004). What is a TOT? Cognate and translation effects on tip-of-the-tongue states in Spanish–English and Tagalog–English bilinguals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition30, 246–269.
20.
GollanT. H.ForsterK. I.FrostR. (1997). Translation priming with different scripts: Masked priming with cognates and noncognates in Hebrew–English bilinguals.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition23, 1122–1139.
21.
GollanT.KrollJ. F. (2001). Bilingual lexical access.The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind.RappB.Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press321–345.
22.
GollanT. H.MontoyaR. I.WernerG. (2002). Semantic and letter fluency in Spanish–English bilinguals.Neuropsychology16, 562–576.
23.
GreenD. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system.Bilingualism: Language and Cognition1, 67–81.
24.
HasherL.ZacksR. T. (1988). Working memory, comprehension, and aging: A review and a new view.The psychology of learning and motivation.BowerG. H.New York: Academic Press22, 193–225.
25.
HayJ. F.JacobyL. L. (1996). Separating habit and recollection: Memory slips, process dissociations, and probability matching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition22, 1323–1335.
26.
HermansD.BongaertsT.de BotK.SchreuderR. (1998). Producing words in a foreign language: Can speakers prevent interference from their first language?.Bilingualism: Language and Cognition1, 213–229.
27.
KeysB. A.WhiteD. A. (2000). Exploring the relationship between age, executive abilities, and psychomotor speed.Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society6, 76–82.
28.
KramerA. F.LarishJ. (1996). Aging and dual-task performance.Aging and skilled performance.RogersW. R.FiskA. D.WalkerN.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc83–112.
29.
LuC. H.ProctorR. W. (1995). The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects.Psychonomic Bulletin and Review2, 174–207.
30.
MayrU.LiebscherT. (2001). Is there an age deficit in the selection of mental sets?.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology13, 47–69.
31.
McDowdJ. M.ShawR. J. (2000). Attention and aging: A functional perspective.The handbook of aging and cognition. (2nd ed.). CraikF. I. M.SalthouseT. A.Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc221–292.
32.
MoscovitchM.WinocurG. (1992). The neuropsychology of memory and aging.The handbook of aging and cognition.CraikF. I. M.SalthouseT. A.Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc315–372.
33.
NybergL.NilssonL.-G.OlofssonU.BackmanL. (1997). Effects of division of attention during encoding and retrieval on age differences in episodic memory.Experimental Aging Research23, 137–143.
34.
RobertsP. M.GarciaL. J.DesrochersA.HernandezD. (2002). English performance of proficient bilingual adults on the Boston Naming Test.Aphasiology16, 635–645.
35.
RosselliM.ArdilaA.AraujoK.WeekesV. A.CaraccioloV.PadillaM. (2000). Verbal fluency and repetition skills in healthy older Spanish–English bilinguals.Applied Neuropsychology7, 17–24.
36.
RyanJ. D.BialystokE.CraikF. I. M.LoganJ.Bilingual advantages in attentional controlPoster presented at the meeting of the Cognitive Neuroscience Society.San Francisco, CA, USA April.
37.
SalthouseT. A.MilesJ. D. (2002). Aging and time-sharing aspects of executive control.Memory & Cognition30, 572–582.
38.
ShalliceT. (1988). From neuropsychology to mental structureCambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
39.
SombergB. L.SalthouseT. A. (1982). Divided attention abilities in young and old adults.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance8, 651–663.
40.
VerhaeghenP.CerellaJ. (2002). Aging, executive control, and attention: A review of meta-analyses.Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews26, 849–857.
41.
WickensC. D. (1984). Processing resources in attention. In ParasuramanR.DaviesD. R. (Eds.), Varieties of attention (pp. 63–102). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
42.
ZacksR. T.HasherL.LiK. Z. H. (2000). Human memory. In CraikF. I. M.SalthouseT. A. (Eds.), The handbook of aging and cognition. (2nd ed., pp. 293–357). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
