2020
DOI: 10.1016/j.jneuroling.2020.100933
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Bilingualism modifies disengagement of attention networks across the scalp: A multivariate ERP investigation of the IOR paradigm

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 14 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 77 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Given the small language scale, we divided participants into three groups based on their L2 proficiency and the experience of active use of L2: monolinguals were those who could not hold a conversation in L2 and had never actively used their L2s, the Bi-low group were those who used to actively use their L2 but could only hold a basic conversation in L2 at the time of testing (e.g., this could be due to their lesser exposure to and usage of their L2s in their later life), the Bi-high group were those who could hold a conversation in L2 and actively use their L2. We also used an alternative splitting approach following Grundy, Pavlenko, and Bialystok (2020): low and high-proficient bilingual groups were created by averaging bilinguals' L2 proficiency and then doing a median split: participants whose L2 proficiency was below the median were assigned into the Bi-low group and the others were assigned into the Bi-high group. The two approaches to grouping high and low-proficient groups showed the same results.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Given the small language scale, we divided participants into three groups based on their L2 proficiency and the experience of active use of L2: monolinguals were those who could not hold a conversation in L2 and had never actively used their L2s, the Bi-low group were those who used to actively use their L2 but could only hold a basic conversation in L2 at the time of testing (e.g., this could be due to their lesser exposure to and usage of their L2s in their later life), the Bi-high group were those who could hold a conversation in L2 and actively use their L2. We also used an alternative splitting approach following Grundy, Pavlenko, and Bialystok (2020): low and high-proficient bilingual groups were created by averaging bilinguals' L2 proficiency and then doing a median split: participants whose L2 proficiency was below the median were assigned into the Bi-low group and the others were assigned into the Bi-high group. The two approaches to grouping high and low-proficient groups showed the same results.…”
Section: Participantsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In other words, the high neural efficiency of athletes is reflected in the reduction in resource input during pre-processing, which ensures that there are enough resources for late-stage advanced cognitive control. However, some studies on working memory have also shown that the P300 amplitude decreases as task complexity or difficulty increases [ 50 , 51 ].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thirteen studies utilized objective measures of language variables (Barbu et al 2018(Barbu et al , 2020Beatty-Martínez et al 2020;Carter et al 2023;Grundy et al 2020;Han et al 2022;Kałamała et al 2020;Keijzer and Schmid 2016;Kheder and Kaan 2021;Lai and O'Brien 2020;Rodriguez-Fornells et al 2012;Thanissery et al 2020;Xie 2014). Studies that chose to use objective language measures typically did so to measure specific aspects of language use that self-assessment alone cannot gather, such as vocabulary, phonological, or grammatical knowledge (Treffers-Daller 2018).…”
Section: How Is Bilingualism Being Measured In Research?mentioning
confidence: 99%