The current study contrasted cued versus voluntary switching to investigate switching efficiency and possible sharing of control mechanisms across linguistic and non-linguistic domains. Bilinguals switched between naming pictures in Spanish versus English or between reading numbers aloud versus adding their digits, either without or with repetition of stimuli, and with fewer requirements as to when and how much they had to switch relative to previous instantiations of voluntary switching. Without repetition (Experiment 1), voluntary responses were faster than cued responses on both stay and switch trials (especially in the non-linguistic switching task), whereas in previous studies the voluntary advantage was restricted to switch-cost reduction. Similarly, when targets were presented repeatedly (Experiment 2), voluntary responses were faster overall for both linguistic and non-linguistic switching, though here the advantage tended to be larger on switch trials. Experiment 3 confirmed the overall voluntary speed advantage for the read-add task in monolinguals, and revealed a reduction in switch costs only for a different non-linguistic task (size-parity judgments). These results reveal greater overall advantages for voluntary over cued switching than previously reported, but also that the precise manifestation of the voluntary advantage can vary with different tasks. In the linguistic domain, lexical inaccessibility introduces some unique control mechanisms, and repetition may magnify cross-domain overlap in control mechanisms. Finally, under some limited conditions, cost-free switches were found in both linguistic and non-linguistic domains; however, suspension of top-down control may be restricted to language or highly automatic tasks.

It is commonly assumed that bilinguals enable production in their nondominant language by inhibiting their dominant language temporarily, fully lifting inhibition to switch back. In a re-analysis of data from 416 Spanish-English bilinguals who repeatedly named a small set of pictures while switching languages in response to cues, we separated trials into different types that revealed three cumulative effects. Bilinguals named each picture (a) faster for every time they had previously named that same picture in the same language, an asymmetric repetition priming effect that was greater in their nondominant language, and (b) more slowly for every time they had previously named that same picture in the other language, an effect that was equivalent across languages and implies symmetric lateral inhibition between translation equivalents. Additionally, (c) bilinguals named pictures in the dominant language more slowly for every time they had previously named unrelated pictures in the nondominant language, exhibiting asymmetric language-wide global inhibition. These mechanisms dynamically alter the balances of activation between languages and between lemmas, providing evidence for an oft-assumed but seldom demonstrated key mechanism of bilingual control (competition between translations), resolving the mystery of why reversed language dominance sometimes emerges (the combined forces of asymmetrical effects emerge over time in mixed-language blocks), and also explaining other longer-lasting effects (block order). Key signatures of bilingual control can depend on seemingly trivial methodological details (e.g., the number of trials in a block) because inhibition is applied cumulatively at both local and global levels, persisting long after each individual act of selection.

The semantic picture-word interference task has been used to diagnose how speakers resolve competition while selecting words for production. The attentional demands of this resolution process were assessed in two dual-task experiments (tone classification followed by picture naming). In Experiment 1, when pictures and distractor words were presented simultaneously, semantic interference was not observed when tasks maximally overlapped. This replicates a key finding from the literature that suggested that semantic picture-word interference does not require capacity-limited central attentional resources and occurs prior to lexical selection, an interpretation that runs counter to the claims of all major theories of word production. In another Experiment 1 condition, when distractors were presented 250 ms after pictures, interference emerged when tasks maximally overlapped. Together, these findings support an account in which interference resolution and lexical selection both require central resources, but the activation of lexical representations from written words does not. Subsequent analysis revealed that discrepant results obtained in previous replication attempts may be attributable to differences in phonological (ir)regularity between languages. In Experiment 2, degree of semantic interference was manipulated using the cumulative semantic interference paradigm. Interference was observed regardless of task overlap, confirming that lexical selection requires central resources. Together, these findings indicate that a lexical selection locus of semantic picture-word interference – and models of word production that assume such a locus – may be retained.

How do bilinguals switch easily between languages in everyday conversation, when thousands of studies have found that switching slows responses? Previous research has 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 show 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.

A fronto-temporal brain network has long been implicated in language comprehension. However, this network’s role in language production remains debated. In particular, it remains unclear whether all or only some language regions contribute to production, and which aspects of production these regions support. Across 3 functional magnetic resonance imaging experiments that rely on robust individual-subject analyses, we characterize the language network’s response to high-level production demands. We report 3 novel results. First, sentence production, spoken or typed, elicits a strong response throughout the language network. Second, the language network responds to both phrase-structure building and lexical access demands, although the response to phrase-structure building is stronger and more spatially extensive, present in every language region. Finally, contra some proposals, we find no evidence of brain regions—within or outside the language network—that selectively support phrase-structure building in production relative to comprehension. Instead, all language regions respond more strongly during production than comprehension, suggesting that production incurs a greater cost for the language network. Together, these results align with the idea that language comprehension and production draw on the same knowledge representations, which are stored in a distributed manner within the language-selective network and are used to both interpret and generate linguistic utterances.