Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-tn8tq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-15T12:39:55.011Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modality-general and modality-specific bilingual control mechanisms in spoken and written productions

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 March 2024

Tingting Yang ,
Zhenguang G. Cai ,
Weihao Lin  and
Ruiming Wang Open the ORCID record for Ruiming Wang [Opens in a new window]
Tingting Yang
Affiliation:
Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents, Ministry of Education, & Centre for Studies of Psychological Application, School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China
Zhenguang G. Cai
Affiliation:
Department of Linguistics and Modern Languages & Brain and Mind Institute, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR, China
Weihao Lin
Affiliation:
Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents, Ministry of Education, & Centre for Studies of Psychological Application, School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China
Ruiming Wang*
Affiliation:
Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents, Ministry of Education, & Centre for Studies of Psychological Application, School of Psychology, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, China
*
Corresponding author: Ruiming Wang; Email: wangrm@scnu.edu.cn.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Do bilinguals have similar bilingual control mechanisms in speaking and writing? The present study investigated the patterns of switch costs (reflecting reactive language control) and mixing costs (reflecting proactive language control) between Chinese (L1) and English (L2) in spoken and written productions and whether these patterns could be modulated by response-stimulus intervals (RSIs). In two experiments, unbalanced Chinese–English bilinguals completed a cued language switching task in spoken naming (Experiment 1) and written naming (Experiment 2), respectively. The results revealed asymmetrical switch costs (i.e., the larger cost in L1 than in L2) in spoken and written productions in the short RSI condition. However, there were asymmetrical mixing costs in spoken production and symmetrical mixing costs in written production both in the short and long RSIs. These findings suggest that for spoken and written productions, reactive language control operates in similar mechanisms, while proactive language control operates in specific mechanisms.

Keywords

Bilingualismlanguage productionpicture namingmodalitylanguage control
Type
Research Article
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , First View , pp. 1 - 12
Check for updates
Open Practices
Open data
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

This article has earned badges for transparent research practices: Open Data. For details see the Data Availability Statement.

References

Abutalebi, J., & Green, D. (2007). Bilingual language production: The neurocognition of language representation and control. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 20(3), 242–275.Google Scholar
Barr, D. J., Levy, R., Scheepers, C., & Tily, H. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., & Ryan, J. (2006). Executive control in a modified antisaccade task: Effects of aging and bilingualism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(6), 1341–1354.Google Scholar
Bobb, S. C., & 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(5), 568–585.Google Scholar
Breining, B., & Rapp, B. (2019). Investigating the mechanisms of written word production: insights from the written blocked cyclic naming paradigm. Reading and Writing, 32, 65–94.Google Scholar
Broos, W. P., Bencivenni, A., Duyck, W., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2021). Delayed picture naming in the first and second language. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24(2), 389–400.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., Firk, C., & Schiller, N. O. (2007). Bilingual language control: An event-related brain potential study. Brain Research, 1147, 192–208.Google 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(4), 491–511.Google Scholar
Costa, A., Santesteban, M., & Ivanova, I. (2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(5), 1057–1074.Google Scholar
Damian, M. F., Dorjee, D., & Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H. (2011). Long-term repetition priming in spoken and written word production: evidence for a contribution of phonology to handwriting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(4), 813–826.Google Scholar
Declerck, M. (2020). What about proactive language control?. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 27(1), 24–35.Google Scholar
Declerck, M., & Koch, I. (2023). The concept of inhibition in bilingual control. Psychological Review, 130(4), 953.Google Scholar
Declerck, M., & Philipp, A. M. (2015). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 1630–1645.Google Scholar
Declerck, M., Koch, I., & Philipp, A. M. (2012). Digits vs. pictures: The influence of stimulus type on language switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(4), 896–904.Google Scholar
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175–191.Google Scholar
Fink, A., & Goldrick, M. (2015). Pervasive benefits of preparation in language switching. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 22, 808–814.Google Scholar
Forstmann, B. U., Brass, M., & Koch, I. (2007). Methodological and empirical issues when dissociating cue-related from task-related processes in the explicit task-cuing procedure. Psychological Research, 71, 393–400.Google Scholar
Gade, M., Declerck, M., Philipp, A. M., Rey-Mermet, A., & Koch, I. (2021). Assessing the Evidence for Asymmetrical Switch Costs and Reversed Language Dominance Effects–A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Cognition, 4(1), 55.Google Scholar
Gollan, T. H., Kleinman, D., & Wierenga, C. E. (2014). What's easier: Doing what you want, or being told what to do? Cued versus voluntary language and task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143(6), 2167–2195.Google Scholar
Gould, J. D., & Boies, S. J. (1978). Writing, dictating, and speaking letters. Science, 201(4361), 1145–1147.Google Scholar
Grange, J. A., & Cross, E. (2015). Can time-based decay explain temporal distinctiveness effects in task switching?. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68(1), 19–45.Google Scholar
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1(2), 67–81.Google Scholar
Hanulová, J., Davidson, D. J., & Indefrey, P. (2011). Where does the delay in L2 picture naming come from? Psycholinguistic and neurocognitive evidence on second language word production. Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(7), 902–934.Google Scholar
Heikoop, K. W., Declerck, M., Los, S. A., & Koch, I. (2016). Dissociating language-switch costs from cue-switch costs in bilingual language switching. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(5), 921–927.Google Scholar
Horoufchin, H., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2011). The dissipating task-repetition benefit in cued task switching: Task-set decay or temporal distinctiveness?. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(2), 455–472.Google Scholar
Ivanova, I., & Hernandez, D. C. (2021). Within-language lexical interference can be resolved in a similar way to between-language interference. Cognition, 214, 104760.Google Scholar
Jylkkä, J., Lehtonen, M., Lindholm, F., Kuusakoski, A., & Laine, M. (2018). The relationship between general executive functions and bilingual switching and monitoring in language production. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(3), 505–522.Google Scholar
Kiesel, A., Steinhauser, M., Wendt, M., Falkenstein, M., Jost, K., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching – A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136(5), 849–874.Google Scholar
Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching. Memory & Cognition, 34(2), 433–444.Google Scholar
Kumle, L., Võ, M. L. H., & Draschkow, D. (2021). Estimating power in (generalized) linear mixed models: An open introduction and tutorial in R. Behavior Research Methods, 53(6), 2528–2543.Google Scholar
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13). https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v082.i13Google Scholar
Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid lexical test for advanced learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44(2), 325–343.Google Scholar
Lenth, R. V. (2022). Emmeans: Estimated Marginal Means, aka Least-Squares Means, https://CRAN.R-project.org/package=emmeans.Google Scholar
Linck, J. A., Schwieter, J. W., & Sunderman, G. (2012). Inhibitory control predicts language switching performance in trilingual speech production. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 15(3), 651–662.Google Scholar
Liu, C., Jiao, L., Wang, Z., Wang, M., Wang, R., & Wu, Y. J. (2019). Symmetries of bilingual language switch costs in conflicting versus non-conflicting contexts. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 22(3), 624–636.Google Scholar
Ma, F., Li, S., & Guo, T. (2016). Reactive and proactive control in bilingual word production: An investigation of influential factors. Journal of Memory and Language, 86, 35–59.Google Scholar
Meuter, R. F., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40(1), 25–40.Google Scholar
Mosca, M., & Clahsen, H. (2016). Examining language switching in bilinguals: The role of preparation time. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 19(2), 415–424.Google Scholar
Mosca, M., & de Bot, K. (2017). Bilingual language switching: Production vs. recognition. Frontiers in psychology, 8, 934.Google Scholar
Muylle, M., Van Assche, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2022). Comparing the cognate effect in spoken and written second language word production. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 25(1), 93–107.Google Scholar
Peeters, D., & Dijkstra, T. (2018). Sustained inhibition of the native language in bilingual language production: A virtual reality approach. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 21(5), 1035–1061.Google Scholar
Perret, C., Bonin, P., & Laganaro, M. (2014). Exploring the multiple-level hypothesis of AoA effects in spoken and written object naming using a topographic ERP analysis. Brain and Language, 135, 20–31.Google 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(3), 395–416.Google Scholar
Prior, A., & Gollan, T. H. (2011). Good language-switchers are good task-switchers: Evidence from Spanish–English and Mandarin–English bilinguals. Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 682–691.Google Scholar
Qu, Q., Feng, C., & Damian, M. F. (2021). Interference effects of phonological similarity in word production arise from competitive incremental learning. Cognition, 212, 104738.Google Scholar
Roembke, T. C., Koch, I., & Philipp, A. M. (2023). Language Switching when Writing: The Role of Phonological and Orthographic Overlap. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231183706Google Scholar
Tainturier, M. J. (2019). A theory of bilingual spelling in alphabetic systems. In Spelling and Writing Words: Theoretical and methodological advances. Brill.Google Scholar
Timmer, K., Grundy, J. G., & Bialystok, E. (2017). Earlier and more distributed neural networks for bilinguals than monolinguals during switching. Neuropsychologia, 106, 245–260.Google Scholar
Verhoef, K., Roelofs, A., & Chwilla, D. J. (2009). Role of inhibition in language switching: Evidence from event-related brain potentials in overt picture naming. Cognition, 110(1), 84–99.Google Scholar
Wong, W. L., & Maurer, U. (2021). The effects of input and output modalities on language switching between Chinese and English. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 24(4), 719–729.Google Scholar
Zhang, Q., & Yang, Y. (2003). The determiners of picture-naming latency. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 35(4), 447–454. (In Chinese)Google Scholar
Supplementary material: File

Yang et al. supplementary material

Yang et al. supplementary material
Download Yang et al. supplementary material(File)
File 180.3 KB