No abstract

Recently, doubts were raised about the existence of the bilingual advantage in cognitive control. The aim of the present review was to investigate the bilingual advantage and its modulating factors. We searched the Medline, ScienceDirect, Scopus, and ERIC databases for all original data and reviewed studies on bilingualism and cognitive control, with a cut-off date of 31 October 2018, thereby following the guidelines of the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis (PRISMA) protocol. The results of the 46 original studies show that indeed, the majority, 54.3%, reported beneficial effects of bilingualism on cognitive control tasks; however, 28.3% found mixed results and 17.4% found evidence against its existence. Methodological differences seem to explain these mixed results: Particularly, the varying selection of the bilingual participants, the use of nonstandardized tests, and the fact that individual differences were often neglected and that longitudinal designs were rare. Therefore, a serious risk for bias exists in both directions (i.e., in favor of and against the bilingual advantage). To conclude, we found some evidence for a bilingual advantage in cognitive control; however, if significant progress is to be made, better study designs, bigger data, and more longitudinal studies are needed.

The Reading Span Test (RST) is a verbal working-memory test. The original RST ( Daneman & Carpenter, 1980 ), and derivatives of it, are being used increasingly as assessments of central executive functioning and for research on aging-associated cognitive decline ( Whitney, Arnett, Driver, & Budd, 2001 ). Several versions have been made in order to further improve the test or to develop a version in a different language. However, all versions changed different things, making direct comparisons of the results with the RST between different research groups and across different languages impossible. This paper presents the results of testing a new standard computerized version of the RST in four languages (Dutch, English, German, and Norwegian). The new RST meets strict methodological criteria that are the same for all four language versions. A plausibility test, an abstract-concrete rating scale, and a pilot-study were conducted on native speakers to test the new RST. In addition, the internal and external reliability and the ecological validity of the new RST were tested. The results showed that the new RST is a suitable test to investigate verbal working memory. Finally, an important advantage of the new RST is that the different language versions make cross-linguistic comparisons of RST results possible.

Language switching experience is assumed to have an effect on domain-general control abilities in bilinguals, but previous studies on the relationship between these two variables have generated mixed results. The present study investigated the effects of bilingual experiences on the interaction between language switching and domain-general control. Thirty-two Dutch–French bilingual young adults executed a bilingual categorisation task to assess their language switching abilities and a Simon task to assess domain-general control. The results show that global response times on the Simon task were correlated to the forward switch cost (from L1 to L2); moreover, interestingly, the forward switch cost was found to be related to recent language exposure but not to the age of second language acquisition. We suggest a monitoring account of language switching to integrate the first finding with previous studies and we interpret the second finding as support for the adaptive control hypothesis.