How do bilinguals switch easily between languages in everyday conversation, even though studies have consistently found that switching slows responses? In previous work, researchers have not considered that although switches may happen for different reasons, only some switches—including those typically studied in laboratory experiments—might be costly. Using a repeated picture-naming task, we found that bilinguals can maintain and use two languages as efficiently as a single language, switching between them frequently without any cost, if they switch only when a word is more accessible in the other language. These results suggest that language switch costs arise during lexical selection, that top-down language control mechanisms can be suspended, and that language-mixing efficiency can be strategically increased with instruction. Thus, bilinguals might switch languages spontaneously because doing so is not always costly, and there appears to be greater flexibility and efficiency in the cognitive mechanisms that enable switching than previously assumed.
AllportA.StylesE. A.HsiehS. (1994). Shifting intentional set: Exploring the dynamic control of tasks. In UmiltàC.MoscovitchM. (Eds.), Attention and performance XV: Conscious and nonconscious information processing (pp. 421–452). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
2.
BaayenR. H.DavidsonD. J.BatesD. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
3.
BarrD. J.LevyR.ScheepersC.TilyH. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68, 225–278. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
ChristoffelsI.FirkC.SchillerN. O. (2007). Bilingual language control: An event-related brain potential study. Brain Research, 1147, 192–208. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2007.01.137
6.
CohenJ. D.MacWhinneyB.FlattM.ProvostJ. (1993). PsyScope: An interactive graphic system for designing and controlling experiments in the psychology laboratory using Macintosh computers. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 25, 257–271. doi:10.3758/BF03204507
7.
CostaA.SantestebanM. (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. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2004.02.002
8.
DeclerckM.KochI.PhilippA. M. (2015). The minimum requirements of language control: Evidence from sequential predictability effects in language switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41, 377–394. doi:10.1037/xlm0000021
9.
DeclerckM.PhilippA. M. (2015a). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1630–1645. doi:10.3758/s13423-015-0836-1
10.
DeclerckM.PhilippA. M. (2015b). A sentence to remember: Instructed language switching in sentence production. Cognition, 137, 166–173. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2015.01.006
11.
DeclerckM.PhilippA. M.KochI. (2013). Bilingual control: Sequential memory in language switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1793–1806. doi:10.1037/a0033094
12.
de SaussureF. (1972). Cours de linguistique générale [Course in general linguistics] (3rd ed., BallyC., Ed.). Paris, France: Payot. (Original work published 1916)
13.
DreisbachG.GoschkeT.HaiderH. (2006). Implicit task sets in task switching?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1221–1233. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1221
14.
DreisbachG.GoschkeT.HaiderH. (2007). The role of task rules and stimulus-response mappings in the task switching paradigm. Psychological Research, 71, 383–392. doi:10.1007/s00426-005-0041-3
15.
FestmanJ.Rodriguez-FornellsA.MünteT. F. (2010). Individual differences in control of language interference in late bilinguals are mainly related to general executive abilities. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 6, Article 5. doi:10.1186/1744-9081-6-5
16.
FilippiR.KaraminisT.ThomasM. S. C. (2014). Language switching in bilingual production: Empirical data and computational modeling. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17, 294–315. doi:10.1017/S1366728913000485
17.
FinkbeinerM.AlmeidaJ.JanssenN.CaramazzaA. (2006). Lexical selection in bilingual speech production does not involve language suppression. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1075–1089. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1075
18.
GollanT. H.FerreiraV. S. (2009). Should I stay or should I switch? A cost-benefit analysis of voluntary language switching in young and aging bilinguals. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 640–665. doi:10.1037/a0014981
19.
GollanT. H.KleinmanD.WierengaC. 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. doi:10.1037/a0038006
20.
GollanT. H.WeissbergerG.RunnqvistE.MontoyaR. I.CeraC. M. (2012). Self-ratings of spoken language dominance: A multi-lingual naming test (MINT) and preliminary norms for young and aging Spanish-English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15, 594–615. doi:10.1017/S1366728911000332
21.
GreenD. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81. doi:10.1017/S1366728998000133
22.
GrosjeanF. (2001). The bilingual’s language modes. In NicolJ. L. (Ed.), One mind, two languages: Bilingual language processing (pp. 1–22). Oxford, England: Basil Blackwell.
23.
GulliferJ. W.KrollJ. F.DussiasP. E. (2013). When language switching has no apparent cost: Lexical access in sentence context. Frontiers in Psychology, 4, Article 278. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00278
24.
GuoT.LiuH.MisraM.KrollJ. F. (2011). Local and global inhibition in bilingual word production: fMRI evidence from Chinese-English bilinguals. NeuroImage, 56, 2300–2309. doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2011.03.049
25.
Guzzardo TamargoR. E. (2012). Linking comprehension costs to production patterns during the processing of mixed language. University Park: The Pennsylvania State University.
26.
HuntA. R.KleinR. M. (2002). Eliminating the cost of task set reconfiguration. Memory & Cognition, 30, 529–539. doi:10.3758/BF03194954
27.
IbáñezA.MacizoP.BajoM. (2010). Language access and language selection in professional translators. Acta Psychologica, 135, 257–266. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2010.07.009
28.
KassR. E.RafteryA. E. (1995). Bayes factors. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 90, 773–795. doi:10.1080/01621459.1995.10476572
29.
KochI.PrinzW.AllportA. (2005). Involuntary retrieval in alphabet-arithmetic tasks: Task-mixing and task-switching costs. Psychological Research, 69, 252–261. doi:10.1007/s00426-004-0180-y
30.
LienM.-C.RuthruffE.RemingtonR. W.JohnstonJ. C. (2005). On the limits of advance preparation for a task switch: Do people prepare all the task some of the time or some of the task all the time?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 31, 299–315. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.31.2.299
31.
MayrU.DiedrichsenJ.IvryR.KeeleS. W. (2006). Dissociating task-set selection from task-set inhibition in the prefrontal cortex. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 18, 14–21. doi:10.1162/089892906775250085
32.
MeiranN. (2000). Reconfiguration of stimulus task sets and response task sets during task switching. In MonsellS.DriverJ. (Eds.), Attention and performance XVIII: Control of cognitive processes (pp. 377–399). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
33.
MeuterR. F. I.AllportA. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40. doi:10.1006/jmla.1998.2602
34.
MisraM.GuoT.BobbS.KrollJ. 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. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2012.05.001
35.
MoscaM.ClahsenH. (2015). Examining language switching in bilinguals: The role of preparation time. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. Advance online publication. doi:10.1017/S1366728915000693
36.
PriorA.GollanT. H. (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. doi:10.1017/S1355617711000580
37.
RogersR. D.MonsellS. (1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231. doi:10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207
38.
RuthruffE.RemingtonR. W.JohnstonJ. C. (2001). Switching between simple cognitive tasks: The interaction of top-down and bottom-up factors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 27, 1404–1419. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.27.6.1404
39.
SchuchS.KochI. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 92–105. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.29.1.92
40.
Van AsscheE.DuyckW.GollanT. H. (2013). Whole-language and item-specific control in bilingual language production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 39, 1781–1792. doi:10.1037/a0032859
41.
VerbruggenF.LiefoogheB.VandierendonckA.DemanetJ. (2007). Short cue presentations encourage advance task preparation: A recipe to diminish the residual switch cost. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 342–356. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.33.2.342
42.
VerhoefK.RoelofsA.ChwillaD. (2009). Role of inhibition in language switching: Evidence from event-related brain potentials in overt picture naming. Cognition, 110, 84–99. doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.013
43.
WaszakF.HommelB.AllportA. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus-task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413. doi:10.1016/S0010-0285(02)00520-0
WaszakF.HommelB.AllportA. (2005). Interaction of task readiness and automatic retrieval in task switching: Negative priming and competitor priming. Memory & Cognition, 33, 595–610. doi:10.3758/BF03195327
46.
ZacharyR. A. (1992). Shipley Institute of Living Scale: Revised manual. Los Angeles, CA: Western Psychological Services.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
