The "bilingual advantage" theory stipulates that constant selection and suppression between 2 languages results in enhanced executive control (EC). Behavioral studies of EC in bilinguals have employed wide-ranging tasks and report some conflicting results. To avoid concerns about tasks, we employed a different approach, measuring gray matter volume (GMV) in adult bilinguals, reasoning that any EC-associated benefits should manifest as relatively greater frontal GMV. Indeed, Spanish-English-speaking bilinguals exhibited greater bilateral frontal GMV compared with English-speaking monolinguals. Was this observation attributable to the constant selection and inhibition of 2 spoken languages? To answer this question, we drew on bimodal bilinguals of American Sign Language (ASL) and English who, unlike unimodal bilinguals, can simultaneously use both languages and have been shown not to possess the EC advantage. In this group, there was no greater GMV when compared with monolinguals. Together these results provide neuroanatomical evidence in support of the bilingual advantage theory.
The study of congenitally deaf adult humans provides an opportunity to examine neuroanatomical plasticity resulting from altered sensory experience. However, attributing the source of the brain's structural variance in the deaf is complicated by the fact that deaf individuals also differ in their language experiences (e.g., sign vs spoken), which likely influence brain anatomy independently. Although the majority of deaf individuals in the United States are born to hearing parents and are exposed to English, not American Sign Language (ASL) as their first language, most studies on deafness have been conducted with deaf native users of ASL (deaf signers). This raises the question of whether observations made in deaf signers can be generalized. Using a factorial design, we compared gray (GMV) and white (WMV) matter volume in deaf and hearing native users of ASL, as well as deaf and hearing native users of English. Main effects analysis of sensory experience revealed less GMV in the deaf groups combined (compared with hearing groups combined) in early visual areas and less WMV in a left early auditory region. The interaction of sensory experience and language experience revealed that deaf native users of English had fewer areas of anatomical differences than did deaf native users of ASL (each compared with their hearing counterparts). For deaf users of ASL specifically, WMV differences resided in language areas such as the left superior temporal and inferior frontal regions. Our results demonstrate that cortical plasticity resulting from deafness depends on language experience and that findings from native signers cannot be generalized.
Previous work in deaf populations on phonological coding and working memory, two skills thought to play an important role in the acquisition of written language skills, have focused primarily on signers or did not clearly identify the subjects' native language and communication mode. In the present study, we examined the effect of sensory experience, early language experience, and communication mode on the phonological awareness skills and serial recall of linguistic items in deaf and hearing individuals of different communicative and linguistic backgrounds: hearing nonsigning controls, hearing users of ASL, deaf users of ASL, deaf oral users of English, and deaf users of cued speech. Since many current measures of phonological awareness skills are inappropriate for deaf populations on account of the verbal demands in the stimuli or response, we devised a nonverbal phonological measure that addresses this limitation. The Phoneme Detection Test revealed that deaf cuers and oral users, but not deaf signers, performed as well as their hearing peers when detecting phonemes not transparent in the orthography. The second focus of the study examined short-term memory skills and found that in response to the traditional digit span as well as an experimental visual version, digit-span performance was similar across the three deaf groups, yet deaf subjects' retrieval was lower than that of hearing subjects. Our results support the claim (Bavelier et al., 2006) that lexical items processed in the visual-spatial modality are not as well retained as information processed in the auditory channel. Together these findings show that the relationship between working memory, phonological coding, and reading may not be as tightly interwoven in deaf students as would have been predicted from work conducted in hearing students.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.