Bilingualism modulates dual mechanisms of cognitive control: Evidence from ERPs

Morales, Julia; Yudes, Carolina; Gómez‐Ariza, Carlos J.; Bajo, M. Teresa

doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2014.11.014

Cited by 120 publications

(172 citation statements)

References 113 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

146

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous studies have already reported the malleability of cognitive control mechanisms engaged in the AX-CPT due to experience-based conditions such as bilingualism (Morales et al, 2013, 2015) or different kinds of training interventions: task-strategy training made older adults (Paxton et al, 2006) and people with schizophrenia (Braver et al, 2009; Edwards et al, 2009) more prone to engage in proactive control; indeed, more similar to adults-like performance than before training. Previous studies have also reported proactive shifts in cortical regions as the lateral PFC after strategy (Braver et al, 2009) and IC training (Berkman et al, 2014), suggesting the possibility that the lateral PFC might serve to anticipate upcoming control demands across a range of executive control domains.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults

Maraver

Bajo

Gómez‐Ariza

2016

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Different types of interventions have focused on trying to improve Executive Functions (EFs) due to their essential role in human cognition and behavior regulation. Although EFs are thought to be diverse, most training studies have targeted cognitive processes related to working memory (WM), and fewer have focused on training other control mechanisms, such as inhibitory control (IC). In the present study, we aimed to investigate the differential impact of training WM and IC as compared with control conditions performing non-executive control activities. Young adults were divided into two training (WM/IC) and two (active/passive) control conditions. Over six sessions, the training groups engaged in three different computer-based adaptive activities (WM or IC), whereas the active control group completed a program with low control-demanding activities that mainly involved processing speed. In addition, motivation and engagement were monitored through the training. The WM-training activities required maintenance, updating and memory search processes, while those from the IC group engaged response inhibition and interference control. All participants were pre- and post-tested in criterion tasks (n-back and Stroop), near transfer measures of WM (Operation Span) and IC (Stop-Signal). Non-trained far transfer outcome measures included an abstract reasoning test (Raven’s Advanced Progressive Matrices) and a well-validated experimental task (AX-CPT) that provides indices of cognitive flexibility considering proactive/reactive control. Training results revealed that strongly motivated participants reached higher levels of training improvements. Regarding transfer effects, results showed specific patterns of near transfer effects depending on the type of training. Interestingly, it was only the IC training group that showed far transfer to reasoning. Finally, all trained participants showed a shift toward a more proactive mode of cognitive control, highlighting a general effect of training on cognitive flexibility. The present results reveal specific and general modulations of executive control mechanisms after brief training intervention targeting either WM or IC.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults

Maraver

Bajo

Gómez‐Ariza

2016

Front. Hum. Neurosci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Consequently, bilinguals should be particularly skilled in resolving interference in comparison to monolinguals, and older bilinguals arguably more so due to their increased language experience. Indeed, imaging and ERP results show that bilinguals more efficiently recruit neural resources while monitoring nonlinguistic cognitive conflict (Abutalebi et al, 2011; Morales, Yudes, Gómez-Ariza, & Bajo, 2015) and while resolving linguistic competition when listening to words (Marian, Chabal, Bartolotti, Bradley, & Hernandez, 2014). Our results support this idea, and could explain why older bilinguals with better Stroop inhibition skills were faster to orient to relevant stimuli on the display, perhaps suggesting that monitoring for conflict contributes to cognitive strengths in older bilinguals.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Auditory word recognition across the lifespan

Blumenfeld

Schroeder²,

Bobb

et al. 2016

LAB

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent research suggests that bilingual experience reconfigures linguistic and nonlinguistic cognitive processes. We examined the relationship between linguistic competition resolution and nonlinguistic cognitive control in younger and older adults who were either bilingual or monolingual. Participants heard words in English and identified the referent among four pictures while eye-movements were recorded. Target pictures (e.g., cab) appeared with a phonological competitor picture (e.g., cat) and two filler pictures. After each eye-tracking trial, priming probes assessed residual activation and inhibition of target and competitor words. When accounting for processing speed, results revealed that age-related changes in activation and inhibition are smaller in bilinguals than in monolinguals. Moreover, younger and older bilinguals, but not monolinguals, recruited similar inhibition mechanisms during word identification and during a nonlinguistic Stroop task. Results suggest that, during lexical access, bilinguals show more consistent competition resolution and recruitment of cognitive control across the lifespan than monolinguals.

show abstract

“…A wealth of data support the distinction between proactive and reactive control and reveal that between-groups as well as intra-individual differences exist in the deployment of such cognitive control modes (e.g., Paxton et al, 2006, 2008; Locke and Braver, 2008; Chatham et al, 2009; Braver et al, 2009; Lesh et al, 2013; Morales et al, 2013, 2015). Thus, for example, it has been shown that healthy young adults exhibit behavioral performance and brain activity (i.e., sustained lateral PFC activation) that are consistent with a predominantly proactive control style, whereas healthy older adults are usually more reactive presumably because proactive control is cognitively more demanding (e.g., Braver et al, 2001; Paxton et al, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Conversely, young adults exhibit a shift from proactive to reactive control under conditions of reward-based monetary incentives (Locke and Braver, 2008). More recently, and on the basis of behavioral and brain activity data, it has been argued that early bilinguals are able to selectively adjust proactive and reactive control more efficiently than their monolingual peers (Morales et al, 2013, 2015), with such an ability being related to the bilinguals' extensive practice in coordinating two languages in their minds (for a discussion of this issue, see Kroll and Bialystok, 2013). …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Tempering Proactive Cognitive Control by Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Right (but Not the Left) Lateral Prefrontal Cortex

2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Behavioral and neuroimaging data support the distinction of two different modes of cognitive control: proactive, which involves the active and sustained maintenance of task-relevant information to bias behavior in accordance with internal goals; and reactive, which entails the detection and resolution of interference at the time it occurs. Both control modes may be flexibly deployed depending on a variety of conditions (i.e., age, brain alterations, motivational factors, prior experience). Critically, and in line with specific predictions derived from the dual mechanisms of control account (Braver, 2012), findings from neuroimaging studies indicate that the same lateral prefrontal regions (i.e., left dorsolateral cortex and right inferior frontal junction) may implement different control modes on the basis of temporal dynamics of activity, which would be modulated in response to external or internal conditions. In the present study, we aimed to explore whether transcraneal direct current stimulation over either the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex or the right inferior frontal junction would differentially modulate performance on the AX-CPT, a well-validated task that provides sensitive and reliable behavioral indices of proactive/reactive control. The study comprised six conditions of real stimulation [3 (site: left dorsolateral, right dorsolateral and right inferior frontal junction) × 2 (polarity: anodal and cathodal)], and one sham condition. The reference electrode was always placed extracephalically. Performance on the AX-CPT was assessed through two blocks of trials. The first block took place while stimulation was being delivered, whereas the second block was administered after stimulation completion. The results indicate that both offline cathodal stimulation of the right dorsolateral prefrontal cortex and online anodal stimulation of the right inferior frontal junction led participants to be much less proactive, with such a dissociation suggesting that both prefrontal regions differentially contribute to the adjustment of cognitive control modes. tDCS of the left-DLPFC failed to modulate cognitive control. These results partially support the predictions derived from the dual mechanisms of control account.

show abstract

Bilingualism modulates dual mechanisms of cognitive control: Evidence from ERPs

Cited by 120 publications

References 113 publications

Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults

Training on Working Memory and Inhibitory Control in Young Adults

Auditory word recognition across the lifespan

Tempering Proactive Cognitive Control by Transcranial Direct Current Stimulation of the Right (but Not the Left) Lateral Prefrontal Cortex

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About