Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-grxwn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-17T13:44:53.709Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of two types of inhibitory control in monolingual and bilingual children*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 March 2008

MICHELLE M. MARTIN-RHEE  and
ELLEN BIALYSTOK
MICHELLE M. MARTIN-RHEE
Affiliation:
Harcourt Assessment/The Psychological Corporation
ELLEN BIALYSTOK*
Affiliation:
York University
*
Address for correspondence: Ellen Bialystok, Department of Psychology, York University, 4700 Keele Street, Toronto, Ontario, M3J 1P3, Canadaellenb@yorku.ca
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Previous research has shown that bilingual children excel in tasks requiring inhibitory control to ignore a misleading perceptual cue. The present series of studies extends this finding by identifying the degree and type of inhibitory control for which bilingual children demonstrate this advantage. Study 1 replicated the earlier research by showing that bilingual children perform the Simon task more rapidly than monolinguals, but only on conditions in which the demands for inhibitory control were high. The next two studies compared performance on tasks that required inhibition of attention to a specific cue, like the Simon task, and inhibition of a habitual response, like the day–night Stroop task. In both studies, bilingual children maintained their advantage on tasks that require control of attention but showed no advantage on tasks that required inhibition of response. These results confine the bilingual advantage found previously to complex tasks requiring control over attention to competing cues (interference suppression) and not to tasks requiring control over competing responses (response inhibition).

Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 11 , Issue 1 , March 2008 , pp. 81 - 93
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The research was funded by a grant from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) to the second author. We are grateful to Jonathan Lipszyc for his assistance in Study 3.

References

Arriaga, R. I., Fenson, L., Cronan, T. & Pethick, S. J. 1998. Scores on the MacArthur Communicative Development Inventory of children from low- and middle-income families. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 209–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. 1999. Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual mind. Child Development, 70, 636–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. 2001. Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. 2006. Effect of bilingualism and computer video game experience on the Simon task. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60, 68–79.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Grady, C., Chau, W., Ishii, R., Gunji, A. & Pantev, C. 2005. Effect of bilingualism on cognitive control in the Simon task: Evidence from MEG. NeuroImage, 24, 40–49.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Klein, R. & Viswanathan, M. 2004. Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology & Aging, 19, 290–303.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M. & Ryan, J. 2006. Executive control in a modified anti-saccade task: Effects of aging and bilingualism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32, 1341–1354.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. & Majumder, S. 1998. The relationship between bilingualism and the development of cognitive processes in problem solving. Applied Psycholinguistics, 19, 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bialystok, E. & Martin, M. M. 2004. Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task. Developmental Science, 7, 325–339.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E. & Senman, L. 2004. Executive processes in appearance–reality tasks: The role of inhibition of attention and symbolic representation. Child Development, 75, 562–579.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bialystok, E. & Shapero, D. 2005. Ambiguous benefits: The effect of bilingualism on reversing ambiguous figures. Developmental Science, 8, 595–604.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brysbaert, M. 1998. Word recognition in bilinguals: Evidence against the existence of two separate lexicons. Psychologica Belgica, 38, 163–175.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bunge, S. A., Dudukovic, N. M., Thomason, M. E., Vaidya, C. J. & Gabrieli, J. D. E. 2002. Immature frontal lobe contributions to cognitive control in children: Evidence from fMRI. Neuron, 33, 301–311.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Corsi, P. M. 1972 Human memory and the medial temporal region. Dissertation Abstracts International, 34 (02), 891B.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Miozzo, M. & Caramazza, A. 1999. Lexical selection in bilinguals: Do words in the bilingual's two lexicons compete for selection? Journal of Memory and Language, 41, 365–397.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Daniels, K., Toth, J. & Jacoby, L. 2006. The aging of executive functions. In Bialystok, E. & Craik, F. I. M. (eds.), Lifespan cognition: Mechanisms of change, pp. 96–111. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Dempster, F. N. 1992. The rise and fall of the inhibitory mechanism: Toward a unified theory of cognitive development and aging. Developmental Review, 12, 45–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, A. 2002. Normal development of prefrontal cortex from birth to young adulthood: Cognitive functions, anatomy, and biochemistry. In Stuss, D. T. & Knight, R. T. (eds.), Principles of frontal lobe function, pp. 466–503. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Diamond, A., Kirkham, N. & Amso, D. 2002. Conditions under which young children CAN hold two rules in mind and inhibit a prepotent response. Developmental Psychology, 38, 352–362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diamond, A., O'Craven, K. M. & Savoy, R. L. 1998. Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex contributions to working memory and inhibition as revealed by fMRI. Society for Neuroscience Abstracts, 24, 1251.Google Scholar
Diamond, A. & Taylor, C. 1996. Development of an aspect of executive control: Development of the abilities to remember what I said and to “do as I say, not as I do”. Developmental Psychology, 29, 315–334.3.0.CO;2-T>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R. & Green, F. L. 1983. Development of the Appearance/Reality distinction. Cognitive Psychology, 15, 95–120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Flavell, J. H., Flavell, E. R. & Green, F. L. 1987. Young children's knowledge about apparent/real and pretend/real distinctions. Developmental Psychology, 23, 816–822.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerstadt, C. L., Hong, Y. J. & Diamond, A. 1994. The relationship between cognition and action: Performance of children 3;12–7 years old on a Stroop-like daynight test. Cognition, 53, 129–153.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gollan, T. H. & Kroll, J. F. 2001. Bilingual lexical access. In Rapp, B. (ed.), The handbook of cognitive neuropsychology: What deficits reveal about the human mind, pp. 321–345. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H. & Silverberg, N. B. 2001. Tip-of-the-tongue states in Hebrew–English bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 4, 63–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Grainger, J. & Beauvillain, C. 1987. Language blocking and lexical access in bilinguals. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 39A, 295–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. 1998. Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harnishfeger, K. K. & Bjorklund, D. F. 1993. The ontogeny of inhibition mechanisms: A renewed approach to cognitive development. In Pasnak, R. & Howe, M. (eds.), Emerging themes in cognitive development (vol. 1), pp. 28–49. New York: Springer Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hommel, B. 1994. Spontaneous decay of response-code activation. Psychological Research, 56, 261–268.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kolb, B. & Wishaw, I. Q. 2001. An introduction to brain and behaviour. New York: Worth Publishers.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F. & Dijkstra, A. (T.) 2002. The bilingual lexicon. In Kaplan, R. (ed.), Handbook of applied linguistics, 301–321. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Kroll, J. F. & Stewart, E. 1994. Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
La Heij, W. 2005. Selection processes in monolingual and bilingual lexical access. In Kroll, J. F. & de Groot, A. M. B. (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches, pp. 289–307. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Lu, C.-H. & Proctor, R. W. 1995. The influence of irrelevant location information on performance: A review of the Simon and spatial Stroop effects. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 2, 174–207.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, C.-H. & Proctor, R. W. 2001. Influence of irrelevant information on human performance: Effects of S–R association strength and relative timing. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology A: Human Experimental Psychology, 54A, 95–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oller, D. K. & Eilers, R. 2002. Language and literacy in bilingual children. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ozonoff, S. & Jensen, J. 1999. Specific executive function profiles in three neurodevelopmental disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 29, 171–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ozonoff, S., Pennington, B. F. & Rogers, S. J. 1991. Executive function deficits in high-functioning autistic individuals: Relationship to theory of mind. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 32, 1081, 1105.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pascual-Leone, J. 1969. Water Level Test. York University, Toronto.Google Scholar
Rescorla, L. 1989. The Language Development Survey: A screening tool for delayed language in toddlers. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 54, 587–599.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simon, J. R. 1969. Reactions towards the source of stimulation. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 81, 174–176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simon, J. R. & Craft, J. L. 1970. Effects of an irrelevant auditory stimulus on visual choice reaction time. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 86, 272–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tipper, S. P. 1992. Selections for actions: The role of inhibitory mechanisms. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 1, 105–112.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zelazo, P. D., Reznick, J. S. & Pinon, D. E. 1995. Response control and the execution of verbal rules. Developmental Psychology, 31, 508–517.CrossRefGoogle Scholar