Different trajectories for becoming bilingual lead to comparable outcomes in cognitive flexibility

Abstract

Aims and Objective:

Bilingualism has been proposed to affect cognitive flexibility, but findings in the literature are mixed. One reason for this might be the different trajectories of how participants acquired the second language, either through immersion or formal education. The present study investigates differences and commonalities of becoming bilingual depending on trajectory.

Methodology:

To assess cognitive flexibility, participants completed a task-switching and a language-switching paradigm, which were well-matched to each other. Language capabilities were assessed by self-report, objective fluency measures, and balance quotients. We assessed participants of five bilingual populations who together spoke five different languages.

Data and Analysis:

We analyzed global mixing costs, reflecting proactive language and task control, as well as local switch costs, reflecting reactive language and task control processes. The impact of language capabilities on mixing costs was assessed using linear mixed models. We also report correlations among language capability measures, sociodemographic variables, and working memory.

Findings:

We observed reliable mixing costs but no switch costs. Task and language mixing costs were smaller in participants who had a later age of L2 onset and higher L2 phonemic fluency, namely those who followed the formal education path to bilingualism. L2 phonemic fluency was the most consistent predictor for overall performance speed and reduced mixing costs.

Originality:

Using three different study sites and participants differing in their trajectory of becoming bilingual, this study provides a more diverse picture than many previous studies. Furthermore, using small language populations, the study shows the benefits of language fluency measures that are widely available.

Significance and Implications:

The present study bolsters the conceptualization of bilingualism as a multifaceted experience. Nonetheless, in the current study, bilingualism led to comparable outcomes in cognitive flexibility. Finally, measuring language capabilities should carefully consider cognitive processes not related to language that could explain variability in performance.

Keywords

Bilingualism cognitive flexibility proactive control formal education immersion

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Abreu

P. M. J. E.

de Cruz-Santos

Tourinho

C. J.

Martin

Bialystok

(2012). Bilingualism enriches the poor: Enhanced cognitive control in low-income minority children. Psychological Science, 23, 1364–1371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797612443836

Amenta

Badan

Brysbaert

(2020). LexITA: A quick and reliable assessment tool for Italian L2 receptive vocabulary size. Applied Linguistics, 42, 1–24.

Anderson

J. A. E.

Hawrylewicz

Bialystok

(2020). Who is bilingual? Snapshots across the lifespan. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(5), 929–937. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000950

Baayen

R. H.

Davidson

D. J.

Bates

D. M.

(2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59, 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005

Barr

D. J.

Levy

Scheepers

Tily

H. J.

(2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001

Bates

Mächler

Bolker

Walker

(2015). Fitting linear mixed-effects models using lme4. Journal of Statistical Software, 67, 1–48. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v067.i01

Beatty-Martínez

A. L.

Navarro-Torres

C. A.

Dussias

P. E.

Bajo

M. T.

Guzzardo Tamargo

R. E.

Kroll

J. F.

(2020). Interactional context mediates the consequences of bilingualism for language and cognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 46, 1022–1047. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000770

Bialystok

Craik

F. I. M.

Luk

(2012). Bilingualism: Consequences for mind and brain. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 16, 240–250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2012.03.001

Bialystok

Craik

F. I. M.

Ryan

(2006). Executive control in a modified antisaccade task: Effects of aging and bilingualism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1341–1354. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1341

10.

Branzi

F. M.

Calabria

Gade

Fuentes

L. J.

Costa

(2018). On the bilingualism effect in task switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21, 195–208. https://doi.org/10.1017/S136672891600119X

11.

Braver

T. S.

Gray

J. R.

Burgess

G. C.

(2007). Explaining the many varieties of working memory variation: Dual mechanisms of cognitive control. In Conway

A. R. A.

Jarrold

Kane

M. J.

Miyake

Towse

J. N.

(Eds.), Variation in working memory (pp. 76–106). Oxford University Press.

12.

Brysbaert

(2013). Lextale_FR a fast, free, and efficient test to measure language proficiency in French. Psychologica Belgica, 53(1), 23–37.

13.

Castro

Wodniecka

Timmer

(2022). Am I truly monolingual? Exploring foreign language experiences in monolinguals. PLOS ONE, 17(3), Article e0265563.

14.

Chrysikou

E. G.

Weber

M. J.

Thompson-Schill

S. L.

(2014). A matched filter hypothesis for cognitive control. Neuropsychologia, 62, 341–355. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.10.021

15.

Council of Europe. (2018). Common European Framework of Reference for Languages: Learning, teaching, assessment (CEFR). Language policy. https://www.coe.int/en/web/language-policy/cefr

16.

Costa

Hernández

Costa-Faidella

Sebastián-Gallés

(2009). On the bilingual advantage in conflict processing: Now you see it, now you don’t. Cognition, 113, 135–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.08.001

17.

Costa

Santesteban

Ivanova

(2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1057–1074. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.5.1057

18.

de Bruin

. (2019). Not all bilinguals are the same: A call for more detailed assessments and descriptions of bilingual experiences. Behavioral Sciences, 9, 33. https://doi.org/10.3390/bs9030033

19.

Declerck

(2020). What about proactive language control? Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24–35. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-019-01654-1

20.

Declerck

Philipp

A. M.

(2015). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1630–1645. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0836-1

21.

Dreisbach

Goschke

Haider

(2006). Implicit task sets in task switching? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1221–1233. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.32.6.1221

22.

Dreisbach

Goschke

Haider

(2007). The role of task rules and stimulus–response mappings in the task switching paradigm. Psychological Research, 71, 383–392. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-005-0041-3

23.

Fadlon

Prior

Gollan

T. H.

(2019). Using what’s there: Bilinguals adaptively rely on orthographic and color cues to achieve language control. Cognition, 191, 103990. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2019.06.002

24.

Frings

Hommel

Koch

Rothermund

Dignath

Giesen

Kiesel

Kunde

Mayr

Moeller

Möller

Pfister

Philipp

(2020). Binding and Retrieval in Action Control (BRAC). Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 24, 375–387. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2020.02.004

25.

Gade

(2015). On tasks and cognitive constructs for the bilingual (non-) advantage. Cortex, 73, 347–348. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cortex.2015.07.017

26.

Gollan

T. H.

Weissberger

G. H.

Runnqvist

Montoya

R. I.

Cera

C. 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, 15(3), 594–615. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728911000332

27.

Green

D. W.

Abutalebi

(2013). Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 515–530. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2013.796377

28.

Grundy

J. G.

(2020). The effects of bilingualism on executive functions: An updated quantitative analysis. Journal of Cultural Cognitive Science, 4(2), 177–199. https://doi.org/10.1007/s41809-020-00062-5

29.

Gullifer

J. W.

Kousaie

Gilbert

A. C.

Grant

Giroud

Coulter

Klein

Amenta

Phillips

Titone

(2021). Bilingual language experience as a multidimensional spectrum: Associations with objective and subjective language proficiency. Applied Psycholinguistics, 42(2), 245–278. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000521

30.

Gullifer

J. W.

Pivneva

Whitford

Sheikh

N. A.

Titone

(2023). Bilingual language experience and its effect on conflict adaptation in reactive inhibitory control tasks. Psychological Science, 34(2), 238–251. https://doi.org/10.1177/09567976221113764

31.

Gullifer

J. W.

Titone . (2020). Characterizing the social diversity of bilingualism using language entropy. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23, 283–294. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000026

32.

Hartanto

Yang

(2016). Disparate bilingual experiences modulate task-switching advantages: A diffusion-model analysis of the effects of interactional context on switch costs. Cognition, 150, 10–19.

33.

Hommel

(1997). Interactions between stimulus-stimulus congruence and stimulus-response compatibility. Psychological Research, 59, 248–260. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00439302

34.

Hommel

(2009). Action control according to TEC (theory of event coding). Psychological Research, 73, 512–526. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-009-0234-2

35.

Hommel

Wiers

R. W.

(2017). Towards a unitary approach to human action control. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 21, 940–949. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2017.09.009

36.

Izura

Cuetos

Brysbaert

(2014). Lextale-Esp: A test to rapidly and efficiently assess the Spanish vocabulary size. Psicológica, 35(1), 49–66.

37.

Kałamała

Senderecka

Wodniecka

(2021). On the multidimensionality of bilingualism and the unique role of language use*. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 25, 471–483. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728921001073

38.

Kaushanskaya

Blumenfeld

H. K.

Marian

(2019). The Language Experience and Proficiency Questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Ten years later. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23, 945–950. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728919000038

39.

Kaushanskaya

Prior

(2015). Variability in the effects of bilingualism on cognition: It is not just about cognition, it is also about bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 27–28.

40.

Kavé

(2005). Phonemic fluency, semantic fluency, and difference scores: Normative data for adult Hebrew speakers. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 27, 690–699. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803390490918499

41.

Lehtonen

Soveri

Laine

Järvenpää

de Bruin

Antfolk

(2018). Is bilingualism associated with enhanced executive functioning in adults? A meta-analytic review. Psychological Bulletin, 144, 394–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000142

42.

Lemhöfer

Broersma

(2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 325–343.

43.

Linck

J. A.

Osthus

Koeth

J. T.

Bunting

M. F.

(2014). Working memory and second language comprehension and production: A meta-analysis. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 21(4), 861–883. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-013-0565-2

44.

Logan

G. D.

Gordon

R. D.

(2001). Executive control of visual attention in dual-task situations. Psychological Review, 108, 393–434. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.2.393

45.

Luk

(2015). Who are the bilinguals (and monolinguals)? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 35–36. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000625

46.

Luk

De Sa

Bialystok

(2011). Is there a relation between onset age of bilingualism and enhancement of cognitive control? Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 14, 588–595. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728911000010

47.

Lynch

(2017). Bilingualism and second language acquisition. Second and Foreign Language Education, Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 4, 43–55.

48.

Guo

(2016). Reactive and proactive control in bilingual word production: An investigation of influential factors. Journal of Memory and Language, 86, 35–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.08.004

49.

Marian

Blumenfeld

H. K.

Kaushanskaya

(2007). The language experience and proficiency questionnaire (LEAP-Q): Assessing language profiles in bilinguals and multilinguals. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, 50, 940–967. https://doi.org/10.1044/1092-4388(2007/067)

50.

Marian

Hayakawa

(2020). Measuring bilingualism: The quest for a “bilingualism quotient.” Applied Psycholinguistics, 1, 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0142716420000533

51.

Mor

Yitzhaki-Amsalem

Prior

(2014). The joint effect of bilingualism and ADHD on executive functions. Journal of Attention Disorders, 19(6), 527–541. https://doi.org/10.1177/1087054714527790

52.

Oberauer

Souza

Druey

M. D.

Gade

(2013). Analogous mechanisms of selection and updating in declarative and procedural working memory: Experiments and a computational model. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 157–211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.11.001

53.

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. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2014.891597

54.

Paap

K. R.

Sawi

(2014). Bilinguals advantages in executive functions: Problems in convergent validity, divergent validity, and the identification of theoretical contructs. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, Article 962 https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00962

55.

Philipp

A. M.

Gade

Koch

(2007). Inhibitory processes in language switching: Evidence from switching language-defined response sets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 395–416. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440600758812

56.

Philipp

A. M.

Huestegge

(2015). Language switching between sentences in reading: Exogenous and endogenous effects on eye movements and comprehension. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 18, 614–625. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728914000753

57.

Philipp

A. M.

Koch

(2010). The integration of task-set components into cognitive task representations. Psychologica Belgica, 50, 383. https://doi.org/10.5334/pb-50-3-4-383

58.

Prior

Goldwasser

Ravet-Hirsch

Schwartz

(2016). Executive functions in bilingual children: Is there a role for language balance?. In Sunderman

Schwieter

J. W.

(Eds.), Cognitive control and consequences in the multilingual mind (pp. 323–350). John Benjamins Publishing Company.

59.

Prior

Gollan

T. H.

(2011). Good language-switchers are good task-switchers: Evidence from S panish–E nglish and M andarin–E nglish bilinguals. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 682–691. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617711000580

60.

Prior

Gollan

T. H.

(2013). The elusive link between language control and executive control: A case of limited transfer. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 622–645. https://doi.org/10.1080/20445911.2013.821993

61.

Prior

MacWhinney

(2010). A bilingual advantage in task switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 13, 253–262. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728909990526

62.

Prior

van Hell

J. G.

(2021). Including bilingual participants in cognitive research. In Francis

W. S.

(Ed.), Bilingualism Across the Lifespan (1st ed.). Routledge.

63.

Rabbitt

(1997). Methodology of frontal and executive function. Psychology Press.

64.

R Core Team. (2021). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R. R Foundation for Statistical Computing. http://www.R-project.org/

65.

Rey-Mermet

(2020). Finding an interaction between Stroop congruency and flanker congruency requires a large congruency effect: A within-trial combination of conflict tasks. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 82, 2271–2301. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13414-019-01914-1

66.

Rey-Mermet

Gade

Souza

A. S.

von Bastian

C. C.

Oberauer

(2019). Executive control is not related to working memory capacity and fluid intelligence. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 148, 1335–1372. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000593

67.

Rogers

R. D.

Monsell

(1995). Costs of a predictable switch between simple cognitive tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 207–231. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.124.2.207

68.

Rouder

J. N.

Haaf

J. M.

(2019). A psychometrics of individual differences in experimental tasks. Psychomic Bulletin & Review, 26, 452–467. https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/f3h2k

69.

Rubin

Meiran

(2005). On the origins of the task mixing cost in the cuing task-switching paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 31, 1477–1491. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.31.6.1477

70.

Ruthruff

Remington

R. W.

Johnston

J. 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. https://doi.org/10.1037/0096-1523.27.6.1404

71.

Sarangi

(2003). Applied linguistics & communities of practice: BAAL Volume 18. A&C Black.

72.

Segal

Prior

Gollan

T. H.

(2021). Do all switches cost the same? Reliability of language switching and mixing costs. Journal of Cognition, 4, 3.

73.

Stasenko

Matt

G. E.

Gollan

T. H.

(2017). A relative bilingual advantage in switching with preparation: Nuanced explorations of the proposed association between bilingualism and task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 146, 1527. https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/xge0000340

74.

Surrain

S. H.

Luk

(2019). Describing bilinguals: A systematic review of labels and descriptions used in the literature between 2005–2015. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22, 401–415.

75.

Timmer

Calabria

Branzi

F. M.

Baus

Costa

(2018). On the reliability of switching costs across time and domains. Frontiers in Psychology, 9, 1032. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01032

76.

Tombaugh

T. N.

Kozak

Rees

(1999). Normative data stratified by age and education for two measures of verbal fluency: FAS and animal naming. Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology, 14, 167–177.

77.

Tomoschuk

Ferreira

V. S.

Gollan

T. H.

(2019). When a seven is not a seven: Self-ratings of bilingual language proficiency differ between and within language populations. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22, 516–536. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1366728918000421

78.

von Bastian

C. C.

Souza

A. S.

Gade

. (2016). No evidence for bilingual cognitive advantages: A test of four hypotheses. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 145, 246–258. https://doi.org/10.1037/xge0000120

79.

Vrantsidis

D. M.

Clark

C. A. C.

Chevalier

Espy

K. A.

Wiebe

S. A.

(2020). Socioeconomic status and executive function in early childhood: Exploring proximal mechanisms. Developmental Science, 23, Article e12917. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12917

80.

Xia

Bak

T. H.

Vega-Mendoza

Sorace

(2023). A longitudinal investigation of the effects of language instruction versus immersion on cognitive functions in young adult Chinese speakers learning English. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 45(1), 189–211. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263122000158

81.

Yang

Hartanto

Yang

(2016). The complex nature of bilinguals’ language usage modulates task-switching outcomes. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, Article 560.

82.

Yow

W. Q.

(2015). Balanced bilingualism and early age of second language acquisition as the underlying mechanisms of a bilingual executive control advantage: Why variations in bilingual experiences matter. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, Article 164. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.00164

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.

0.00 MB

0.02 MB