Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-564cf476b6-pxp6n Total loading time: 0.241 Render date: 2021-06-18T17:45:18.789Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true }

Modality effects in language switching: Evidence for a bimodal advantage

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 January 2017

EMILY KAUFMANN
Affiliation:
Human Technology Centre, RWTH Aachen University Pedagogy and Rehabilitation of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, University of Cologne
IRENE MITTELBERG
Affiliation:
Human Technology Centre, RWTH Aachen University
IRING KOCH
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University
ANDREA M. PHILIPP
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

In language switching, it is assumed that in order to produce a response in one language, the other language must be inhibited. In unimodal (spoken-spoken) language switching, the fact that the languages share the same primary output channel (the mouth) means that only one language can be produced at a time. In bimodal (spoken-signed) language switching, however, it is possible to produce both languages simultaneously. In our study, we examined modality effects in language switching using multilingual subjects (speaking German, English, and German Sign Language). Focusing on German vocal responses, since they are directly compatible across conditions, we found shorter reaction times, lower error rates, and smaller switch costs in bimodal vs. unimodal switching. This result suggests that there are different inhibitory mechanisms at work in unimodal and bimodal language switching. We propose that lexical inhibition is involved in unimodal switching, whereas output channel inhibition is involved in bimodal switching.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

Footnotes

*This research was funded in part by the Excellence Initiative of the German Federal and State Governments.

References

Arrington, C. M., Altmann, E. M., & Carr, T. H. (2003). Tasks of a feather flock together: Similarity effects in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 31, 781789.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bobb, S., & Wodniecka, Z. (2013). Language switching in picture naming. What asymmetric switch costs (do not) tell us about inhibition in bilingual speech planning. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 25, 568585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., & Caramazza, A. (1999). Is lexical selection in bilingual speech production language-specific? Further evidence from Spanish–English and English–Spanish bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2, 231244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., & Santesteban, M. (2004). Lexical access in bilingual speech production: Evidence from language switching in highly proficient bilinguals and L2 learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 491511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Declerck, M., & Philipp, A. M. (2015). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 16301645.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Declerck, M., Thoma, A. M., Koch, I., & Philipp, A. M. (2015). Highly proficient bilinguals implement inhibition – Evidence from n-2 language repetition costs. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 41, 19111916.Google ScholarPubMed
Emmorey, K., Borinstein, H. B., Thompson, R., & Gollan, T. H. (2008a). Bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 4361.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmorey, K., Luk, G., Pyers, J. E., & Bialystok, E. (2008b). The source of enhanced cognitive control in bilinguals: Evidence from bimodal bilinguals. Psychological Science, 19, 12011206.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Emmorey, K., Giezen, M. R., & Gollan, T.H. (2016). Psycholinguistic, cognitive, and neural implications of bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 223242.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Finkbeiner, M., & Caramazza, A. (2006). Lexical selection is not a competitive process: A reply to La Heij, Kuipers and Starreveld. Cortex, 42, 10321035.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Giezen, M. R., Blumenfeld, H. K., Shook, A., Marian, V., & Emmorey, K. (2015). Parallel language activation and inhibitory control in bimodal bilinguals. Cognition, 141, 925.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gollan, T. H., Schotter, E. R., Gomez, J., Murillo, M., & Rayner, K. (2014). Multiple levels of bilingual language control: Evidence from language intrusions in reading aloud. Psychological Science, 25, 585595.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Green, D. W. (1986). Control, activation and resource: A framework and a model for the control of speech in bilinguals. Brain and Language, 27, 210223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 6781.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heikoop, K., Declerck, M., Los, S., & Koch, I. (2016). Dissociating language-switch costs from cue-switch costs in bilingual language switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19, 921927.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaufmann, E., & Philipp, A. M. (2015). Language-switch costs and dual-response costs in bimodal bilingual language production. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition. Online First (2 December 2015). DOI: 10.1017/S1366728915000759 Google Scholar
Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 114.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., Misra, M., & Guo, T. (2008). Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes. Acta Psychologica, 128, 416430.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., & Wodniecka, Z. (2006). Language selectivity is the exception, not the rule: Arguments against a fixed locus of language selection in bilingual speech. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 9, 119135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meuter, R. F. I., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 2540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milroy, L., & Muysken, P. (1995). One speaker, two languages: Cross-disciplinary perspectives on code-switching. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philipp, A. M., Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Inhibitory processes in language switching: Evidence from switching language-defined response sets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 395416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2009). Inhibition in language switching: What is inhibited when switching between languages in naming tasks? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 11871195.Google ScholarPubMed
Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2011). The role of response modalities in cognitive task representations. Advances in Cognitive Psychology, 7, 3138.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Szekely, A., Jacobsen, T., D'Amico, S., Devescovi, A., Andonova, E., Herron, D., Lu, C.C., Pechmann, T., Pléh, C., Wicha, N., Federmeier, K., Gerdjikova, I., Gutierrez, G., Hung, D., Hsu, J., Iyer, G., Kohnert, K., Mehotcheva, T., Orozco-Figueroa, A., Tzeng, A., Tzeng, O., Arévalo, A., Vargha, A., Butler, A. C., Buffington, R., & Bates, E. (2004). A new on-line resource for psycholinguistic studies. Journal of Memory and Language, 51, 247250.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Modality effects in language switching: Evidence for a bimodal advantage
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Modality effects in language switching: Evidence for a bimodal advantage
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Modality effects in language switching: Evidence for a bimodal advantage
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *