Are bilingual advantages dependent upon specific tasks or specific bilingual experiences?

Paap, Kenneth R.; Johnson, Hunter A.; Sawi, Oliver

doi:10.1080/20445911.2014.944914

Cited by 218 publications

(218 citation statements)

References 70 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

190

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…without dense code-switching) give rise to enhanced executive control, and there is evidence to support this hypothesis from both children and adults of different ages. However, it should be noted that an increasing number of studies testing bilingual samples from similar dual-language contexts (in which codeswitching occurs to a lesser degree) have failed to find differences between bilinguals and controls (Paap & Greenberg, 2013;Paap, Johnson, & Sawi, 2014;. It remains to be seen whether some other factor(s) can explain the lack of a bilingual advantage in these cases.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

García-Pentón

García

Costello

et al. 2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

120

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:The neuroanatomical bases of bilingualism have recently received intensive attention.However, it is still a matter of debate how the brain structure changes due to bilingual experience since current findings are highly variable. The aim of this review is to examine these structural studies from a methodological perspective and to discuss two major methodological problems that could give rise to this variability. The first problem is sample selection, an issue directly related to the heterogeneous nature of bilingualism. The second problem is the inconsistency in the methods used for the analysis of brain imaging data. This review reveals that although structural changes related to bilingualism have been reported in regions comprising language/cognitive control and language processing, these results are not yet sufficiently numerous or consistent to allow important generalizations to be reached. Consequently, current evidence offers ambiguous support for neural models of bilingualism. This shortcoming in the field is exacerbated by critical methodological differences between studies that only further complicate the matter. We conclude by identifying issues that should be taken into consideration so that studies are more comparable and results are easier to aggregate and interpret. We also point out future directions that would allow for progress in the field.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 85%

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

García-Pentón

García

Costello

et al. 2015

Language, Cognition and Neuroscience

120

108

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Hence, BFs allow for evaluating the strength of evidence not only for the presence of an association, but explicitly also for the absence of a proposed association. Accordingly, using BFs has become increasingly popular in the area of cognitive enhancement (e.g., Antón et al 2014;Clark et al 2017;De Simoni and von Bastian 2017;Guye and von Bastian 2017;Kirk et al 2014;Paap et al 2014;Sprenger et al 2013;von Bastian et al 2017;von Bastian and Oberauer 2013).Based on previous findings, we expected positive associations of motivation (Brose et al 2012), a growth mindset (Jaeggi et al 2014), and conscientiousness (Studer-Luethi et al 2012) with change in training performance. Regarding neuroticism, our expectations were less specific, given that previous literature reported evidence for a negative association of neuroticism with mean training performance and transfer effects, but not with training gains (e.g., Studer-Luethi et al 2012, 2016.…”

mentioning

confidence: 75%

Section: The Present Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Do Individual Differences Predict Change in Cognitive Training Performance? A Latent Growth Curve Modeling Approach

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cognitive training interventions have become increasingly popular as a potential means to cost-efficiently stabilize or enhance cognitive functioning across the lifespan. Large training improvements have been consistently reported on the group level, with, however, large differences on the individual level. Identifying the factors contributing to these individual differences could allow for developing individually tailored interventions to boost training gains. In this study, we therefore examined a range of individual differences variables that had been discussed in the literature to potentially predict training performance. To estimate and predict individual differences in the training trajectories, we applied Latent Growth Curve models to existing data from three working memory training interventions with younger and older adults. However, we found that individual differences in demographic variables, real-world cognition, motivation, cognitionrelated beliefs, personality, leisure activities, and computer literacy and training experience were largely unrelated to change in training performance. Solely baseline cognitive performance was substantially related to change in training performance and particularly so in young adults, with individuals with higher baseline performance showing the largest gains. Thus, our results conform to magnification accounts of cognitive change.Keywords Working memory training . Individual differences . Latent growth curve modeling Over the past decade, there has been an exploding interest in computer-based commercial Bbrain training^programs and in scientific evidence relating to the effectiveness of such interventions, triggered by promising results of working memory (WM) training gains generalizing to previously untrained cognitive abilities such as intelligence in both younger (e.g., Jaeggi et al. 2008) and older adults (e.g., Borella et al. 2010). Although the idea of improving general cognitive functioning within a few weeks is enticing, there is also accumulating evidence against a generalized effect of WM training (e.g., Clark et al. 2017;De Simoni and von Bastian 2017;Guye and von Bastian 2017;Sprenger et al. 2013). Even on the meta-analytic level, evidence is mixed regarding the effectiveness of cognitive training in both younger and older adults (e.g., Au et al. 2015;Dougherty et al. 2016;Karbach and Verhaeghen 2014;Kelly et al. 2014;Lampit et al. 2014;Melby-Lervåg and Hulme 2013;Melby-Lervåg et al. 2016;Schwaighofer et al. 2015;Soveri et al. 2017). Aside from design and methodological choices potentially explaining the diverging findings (e.g., Noack et al. 2009;Shipstead et al. 2012), many authors increasingly articulated the potentially important influence of individual differences on cognitive training trajectories and outcomes (e.g., Buitenweg et al. 2012;Guye et al. 2016;Könen and Karbach 2015;Shah et al. 2012;von Bastian and Oberauer 2014 Individual differences in cognitive functioning (e.g., Ackerman and Lohman 2006) and learning potential (e.g., Stern ...

show abstract

“…In the 34 studies they review, Paap, Johnson, and Sawi (2014) observe that the bilingual advantage tends to be found in studies with small sample sizes and argue that the lack of a significant effect in large-sample studies coupled with significant effects in smallsample studies is worrisome (as it is unexpected given the properties of null hypothesis statistical testing). Donnelly et al (2015) also reveal a significant lab effect across studies, which they speculate could be due to socio-linguistic differences of subject pools or different data-preparation methods such as outlier removal.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Identifying a Threshold for the Executive Function Advantage in Bilingual Children

Cat

Gusnanto

Serratrice

2017

Stud Second Lang Acquis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The literature exploring the executive function correlates of bilingualism is vast, but to date, few studies have concentrated on children, for whom the bilingual advantage appears even more inconsistent than for adults. We investigate a highly heterogeneous group of children (in terms of bilingual experience and socio-economic status) and identify the critical threshold of bilingual experience from which an advantage can be observed at group level. The modeling methods adopted allow the use of fine-grained, continuous factors for age and socio-economic status, thereby effectively controlling for their effect and isolating the specific effect of bilingual experience. We pioneer the use of Cox Proportional Hazard regression to analyze performance in the Simon task. This allows the modeling of all data points without transformation nor outlier removal, and captures both accuracy and reaction time within the same analysis, while also being able to handle multiple predictor variables.

show abstract

Are bilingual advantages dependent upon specific tasks or specific bilingual experiences?

Cited by 218 publications

References 70 publications

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

The neuroanatomy of bilingualism: how to turn a hazy view into the full picture

Do Individual Differences Predict Change in Cognitive Training Performance? A Latent Growth Curve Modeling Approach

Identifying a Threshold for the Executive Function Advantage in Bilingual Children

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About