Refine
Has Fulltext
- no (14)
Document Type
- Article (14) (remove)
Language
- English (14) (remove)
Is part of the Bibliography
- yes (14)
Keywords
- executive functions (4)
- bilingualism (3)
- lexicon size (3)
- spelling (3)
- children (2)
- graphomotor control (2)
- handwriting (2)
- literacy acquisition (2)
- movement kinematics (2)
- primary school (2)
In this study, we investigated the cognitive-emotional interplay by measuring the effects of executive competition (Pessoa, 2013), i.e., how inhibitory control is influenced when emotional information is encountered. Sixty-three children (8 to 9 years of age) participated in an inhibition task (central task) accompanied by happy, sad, or neutral emoticons (displayed in the periphery). Typical interference effects were found in the main task for speed and accuracy, but in general, these effects were not additionally modulated by the peripheral emoticons indicating that processing of the main task exhausted the limited capacity such that interference from the task-irrelevant, peripheral information did not show (Pessoa, 2013). Further analyses revealed that the magnitude of interference effects depended on the order of congruency conditions: when incongruent conditions preceded congruent ones, there was greater interference. This effect was smaller in sad conditions, and particularly so at the beginning of the experiment. These findings suggest that the bottom-up perception of task-irrelevant emotional information influenced the top-down process of inhibitory control among children in the sad condition when processing demands were particularly high. We discuss if the salience and valence of the emotional stimuli as well as task demands are the decisive characteristics that modulate the strength of this relation.
The Wisconsin Card Sorting Test (WCST) is used to test higher-level executive functions or switching, depending on the measures chosen in a study and its goal. Many measures can be extracted from the WCST, but how to assign them to specific cognitive skills remains unclear. Thus, the current study first aimed at identifying which measures test the same cognitive abilities. Second, we compared the performance of mono- and multilingual children in the identified abilities because there is some evidence that bilingualism can improve executive functions. We tested 66 monolingual and 56 multilingual (i.e., bi- and trilingual) primary school children (M-age = 109 months) in an online version of the classic WCST. A principal component analysis revealed four factors: problem-solving, monitoring, efficient errors, and perseverations. Because the assignment of measures to factors is only partially coherent across the literature, we identified this as one of the sources of task impurity. In the second part, we calculated regression analyses to test for group differences while controlling for intelligence as a predictor for executive functions and for confounding variables such as age, German lexicon size, and socioeconomic status. Intelligence predicted problem solving and perseverations. In the monitoring component (measured by the reaction times preceding a rule switch), multilinguals outperformed monolinguals, thereby supporting the view that bi- or multilingualism can improve processing speed related to monitoring.
Matching participants (as suggested by Hope, 2015) may be one promising option for research on a potential bilingual advantage in executive functions (EF). In this study we first compared performances in three EF-tasks of a naturally heterogeneous sample of monolingual (n = 69, age = 9.0 y) and multilingual children (n = 57, age = 9.3 y). Secondly, we meticulously matched participants pairwise to obtain two highly homogeneous groups to rerun our analysis and investigate a potential bilingual advantage. The initally disadvantaged multilinguals (regarding socioeconomic status and German lexicon size) performed worse in updating and response inhibition, but similarly in interference inhibition. This indicates that superior EF compensate for the detrimental effects of the background variables. After matching children pairwise on age, gender, intelligence, socioeconomic status and German lexicon size, performances became similar except for interference inhibition. Here, an advantage for multilinguals in the form of globally reduced reaction times emerged, indicating a bilingual executive processing advantage.
We examined native and non-native English speakers’ processing of indirect object wh-dependencies using a filled-gap paradigm while recording event-related potentials (ERPs). The non-native group was comprised of native German-speaking, proficient non-native speakers of English. Both participant groups showed evidence of linking fronted indirect objects to the subcategorizing verb when this was encountered, reflected in an N400 component. Evidence for continued filler activation beyond the verb was seen only in the non-native group, in the shape of a prolonged left-anterior negativity. Both participant groups showed sensitivity to filled indirect object gaps reflected in a P600 response, which was more pronounced and more globally distributed in our non-native group. Taken together, our results indicate that resolving indirect object dependencies is a two-step process in both native and non-native sentence comprehension, with greater processing cost incurred in non-native compared to native comprehension.
We aimed at unveiling the role of executive functions (EFs) and language-related skills in spelling for mono- versus multilingual primary school children. We focused on EF and language-related skills, in particular lexicon size and phonological awareness (PA), because these factors were found to predict spelling in studies predominantly conducted with monolinguals, and because multilingualism can modulate these factors. There is evidence for (a) a bilingual advantage in EF due to constant high cognitive demands through language control, (b) a smaller mental lexicon in German and (c) possibly better PA. Multilinguals in Germany show on average poorer German language proficiency, what can influence performance on language-based tasks negatively. Thus, we included two spelling tasks to tease apart spelling based on lexical knowledge (i.e., word spelling) from spelling based on non-lexical strategies (i.e., non-word spelling). Our sample consisted of heterogeneous third graders from Germany: 69 monolinguals (age: M = 108 months) and 57 multilinguals (age: M = 111 months). On less language-dependent tasks (e.g., non-word spelling, PA, intelligence, short-term memory (STM) and three EF tasks testing switching, inhibition, and working memory) performance of both groups did not differ significantly. However, multilinguals performed significantly more poorly on tasks measuring German lexicon size and word spelling than monolinguals. Regression analyses revealed that for multilinguals, inhibition was related to spelling, whereas switching was the only EF component to influence word spelling in monolinguals and non-word spelling performance in both groups. By adding lexicon size and other language-related factors to the regression models, the influence of switching was reduced to insignificant effects, but inhibition remained significant for multilinguals. Language-related skills best predicted spelling and both language groups shared those variables: PA for word spelling, and STM for non-word spelling. Additionally, multilinguals’ word spelling performance was also predicted by their German lexicon size, and non-word spelling performance by PA. This study offers an in-depth look at spelling acquisition at a certain point of literacy development. Mono- and multilinguals have the predominant factors for spelling in common, but probably due to superior language knowledge, monolinguals were already able to make use of EF during spelling. For multilinguals, German lexicon size was more important for spelling than EF. For multilinguals’ spelling these functions might come into play only at a later stage.
Cognitive representations and beliefs are what comprise an individual’s self-concept. A positive self-concept is related to and influences academic achievement, and the relationship between a domain-specific self-concept and achievement in the same domain is positive and strong. However, insufficient attention has been paid to these issues among multilingual children. More importantly, since instruction strongly contributes to the development of metacognition and executive functions (EFs), and since the bilingual advantage hypothesis holds that the constant management of multiple languages entails benefits for EF, we bring together these important issues in the present study. We examine the relationship between domain-specific self-concepts and standardized assessment of reading and spelling competences against the background of potential differences in self-concept between monolingual and multilingual German children. While between-group comparisons revealed no significant differences for self-concept nor reading competency, monolinguals outperformed multilinguals in spelling. Correlations between domain-specific self-concepts and academic achievement in reading comprehension, reading fluency, and spelling were positive and significant for both groups. Regardless of language background, children’s evaluations of their academic achievement (reading and spelling) were realistic. We argue, on a theoretical basis, that metacognition and EFs could facilitate a bilingual advantage and improve educational outcomes.
How Germans prepare for the English past tense: Silent production of inflected words during EEG
(2016)
Processes involved in late bilinguals’ production of morphologically complex words were studied using an event-related brain potentials (ERP) paradigm in which EEGs were recorded during participants’ silent productions of English past- and present-tense forms. Twenty-three advanced second language speakers of English (first language [L1] German) were compared to a control group of 19 L1 English speakers from an earlier study. We found a frontocentral negativity for regular relative to irregular past-tense forms (e.g., asked vs. held) during (silent) production, and no difference for the present-tense condition (e.g., asks vs. holds), replicating the ERP effect obtained for the L1 group. This ERP effect suggests that combinatorial processing is involved in producing regular past-tense forms, in both late bilinguals and L1 speakers. We also suggest that this paradigm is a useful tool for future studies of online language production.
Our study addresses the following research questions: Are there differences between handwriting movements on paper and on a tablet computer? Can experienced writers, such as most adults, adapt their graphomotor execution during writing to a rather unfamiliar surface for instance a tablet computer? We examined the handwriting performance of adults in three tasks with different complexity: (a) graphomotor abilities, (b) visuomotor abilities and (c) handwriting. Each participant performed each task twice, once on paper and once on a tablet computer with a pen. We tested 25 participants by measuring their writing duration, in air time, number of pen lifts, writing velocity and number of inversions in velocity. The data were analyzed using linear mixed-effects modeling with repeated measures. Our results reveal differences between writing on paper and on a tablet computer which were partly task-dependent. Our findings also show that participants were able to adapt their graphomotor execution to the smoother surface of the tablet computer during the tasks. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
We aimed at unveiling the role of executive functions (EFs) and language-related skills in spelling for mono- versus multilingual primary school children. We focused on EF and language-related skills, in particular lexicon size and phonological awareness (PA), because these factors were found to predict spelling in studies predominantly conducted with monolinguals, and because multilingualism can modulate these factors. There is evidence for (a) a bilingual advantage in EF due to constant high cognitive demands through language control, (b) a smaller mental lexicon in German and (c) possibly better PA. Multilinguals in Germany show on average poorer German language proficiency, what can influence performance on language-based tasks negatively. Thus, we included two spelling tasks to tease apart spelling based on lexical knowledge (i.e., word spelling) from spelling based on non-lexical strategies (i.e., non-word spelling). Our sample consisted of heterogeneous third graders from Germany: 69 monolinguals (age: M = 108 months) and 57 multilinguals (age: M = 111 months). On less language-dependent tasks (e.g., non-word spelling, PA, intelligence, short-term memory (STM) and three EF tasks testing switching, inhibition, and working memory) performance of both groups did not differ significantly. However, multilinguals performed significantly more poorly on tasks measuring German lexicon size and word spelling than monolinguals. Regression analyses revealed that for multilinguals, inhibition was related to spelling, whereas switching was the only EF component to influence word spelling in monolinguals and non-word spelling performance in both groups. By adding lexicon size and other language-related factors to the regression models, the influence of switching was reduced to insignificant effects, but inhibition remained significant for multilinguals. Language-related skills best predicted spelling and both language groups shared those variables: PA for word spelling, and STM for non-word spelling. Additionally, multilinguals’ word spelling performance was also predicted by their German lexicon size, and non-word spelling performance by PA. This study offers an in-depth look at spelling acquisition at a certain point of literacy development. Mono- and multilinguals have the predominant factors for spelling in common, but probably due to superior language knowledge, monolinguals were already able to make use of EF during spelling. For multilinguals, German lexicon size was more important for spelling than EF. For multilinguals’ spelling these functions might come into play only at a later stage.
Early acquisition of a second language influences the development of language abilities and cognitive functions. In the present study, we used functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging (fMRI) to investigate the impact of early bilingualism on the organization of the cortical language network during sentence production. Two groups of adult multilinguals, proficient in three languages, were tested on a narrative task; early multilinguals acquired the second language before the age of three years, late multilinguals after the age of nine. All participants learned a third language after nine years of age. Comparison of the two groups revealed substantial differences in language-related brain activity for early as well as late acquired languages. Most importantly, early multilinguals preferentially activated a fronto-striatal network in the left hemisphere, whereas the left posterior superior temporal gyrus (pSTG) was activated to a lesser degree than in late multilinguals. The same brain regions were highlighted in previous studies when a non-target language had to be controlled. Hence the engagement of language control in adult early multilinguals appears to be influenced by the specific learning and acquisition conditions during early childhood. Remarkably, our results reveal that the functional control of early and subsequently later acquired languages is similarly affected, suggesting that language experience has a pervasive influence into adulthood. As such, our findings extend the current understanding of control functions in multilinguals.
Bilingual speakers are faced with the problem to keep their languages apart, but do so with interindividually varying success. Cognitive control abilities might be an important factor to explain such interindividual differences. Here we compare two late, balanced and highly proficient bilingual groups (mean age 24 years, L1 Russian, L2 German) which were established according to their language control abilities on a bilingual picture-naming task. One group had difficulties to remain in the instructed target language and switched unintentionally to the non-target language ("switchers"), whereas the other group rarely switched unintentionally ("non-switchers"). This group-specific behavior could not be explained by language background, socio-cultural, or demographic variables. Rather, the non-switchers also demonstrated a faster and better performance on four cognitive control tests (Tower of Hanoi, Ruff Figural Fluency Test, Divided Attention, Go/Nogo). Here, we focus on two additional executive function tasks, theWisconsin Card SortingTest (WCST) and the Flanker task requiring conflict monitoring and conflict resolution. Non-switchers outperformed switchers with regard to speed and accuracy, and were better at finding and applying the correct rules in the WCST. Similarly, in the Flanker task non-switchers performed faster and better on conflict trials and had a higher correction rate following an error. Event-related potential recordings furthermore revealed a smaller error-related negativity in the non-switchers, taken as evidence for a more efficient self-monitoring system. We conclude that bilingual language performance, in particular switching behavior, is related to performance on cognitive control tasks. Better cognitive control, including conflict monitoring, results in decreased unintentional switching.
Although all bilinguals encounter cross-language interference (CLI), some bilinguals are more susceptible to interference than others. Here, we report on language performance of late bilinguals (Russian/German) on two bilingual tasks (interview, verbal fluency), their language use and switching habits. The only between-group difference was CLI: one group consistently produced significantly more errors of CLI on both tasks than the other (thereby replicating our findings from a bilingual picture naming task). This striking group difference in language control ability can only be explained by differences in cognitive control, not in language proficiency or language mode.
Due to their multifunctionality, tablets offer tremendous advantages for research on handwriting dynamics or for interactive use of learning apps in schools. Further, the widespread use of tablet computers has had a great impact on handwriting in the current generation. But, is it advisable to teach how to write and to assess handwriting in pre- and primary schoolchildren on tablets rather than on paper? Since handwriting is not automatized before the age of 10 years, children's handwriting movements require graphomotor and visual feedback as well as permanent control of movement execution during handwriting. Modifications in writing conditions, for instance the smoother writing surface of a tablet, might influence handwriting performance in general and in particular those of non-automatized beginning writers. In order to investigate how handwriting performance is affected by a difference in friction of the writing surface, we recruited three groups with varying levels of handwriting automaticity: 25 preschoolers, 27 second graders, and 25 adults. We administered three tasks measuring graphomotor abilities, visuomotor abilities, and handwriting performance (only second graders and adults). We evaluated two aspects of handwriting performance: the handwriting quality with a visual score and the handwriting dynamics using online handwriting measures [e.g., writing duration, writing velocity, strokes and number of inversions in velocity (NIV)]. In particular, NIVs which describe the number of velocity peaks during handwriting are directly related to the level of handwriting automaticity. In general, we found differences between writing on paper compared to the tablet. These differences were partly task-dependent. The comparison between tablet and paper revealed a faster writing velocity for all groups and all tasks on the tablet which indicates that all participants—even the experienced writers—were influenced by the lower friction of the tablet surface. Our results for the group-comparison show advancing levels in handwriting automaticity from preschoolers to second graders to adults, which confirms that our method depicts handwriting performance in groups with varying degrees of handwriting automaticity. We conclude that the smoother tablet surface requires additional control of handwriting movements and therefore might present an additional challenge for learners of handwriting.