Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-lnqnp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-22T22:56:36.986Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The influence of bilingualism on working memory event-related potentials

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 June 2018

CASSANDRA MORRISON ,
FAROOQ KAMAL  and
VANESSA TALER
CASSANDRA MORRISON
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Canada & Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
FAROOQ KAMAL
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Canada & Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
VANESSA TALER*
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Ottawa, Canada & Bruyère Research Institute, Ottawa, Canada
*
Address for correspondence: Vanessa Taler, University of Ottawa, School of Psychology, Vanier Hall, 136 Jean Jacques Lussier, Ottawa, ON K1N 6N5, Canada[email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Bilingualism has been found to enhance the ability to store and manipulate information in working memory (WM). However, previous studies of WM function in bilingualism have been limited to behavioural measures, leaving questions unanswered regarding the effects of bilingualism on neural mechanisms employed during WM tasks. We recorded brain activity (event-related potentials; ERPs) while participants (23 English-speaking and 21 English–French bilinguals) performed an n-back WM task. Accuracy and reaction time were similar across groups, but monolinguals exhibited smaller P300 amplitudes relative to bilinguals, suggesting that bilinguals have more cognitive resources available to complete cognitively demanding tasks.

Keywords

bilingualismevent-related potentialsworking memory
Type
Research Notes
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 22 , Issue 1 , January 2019 , pp. 191 - 199
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2018 

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

We thank the participants in this study and Giovanna Busa for her assistance with data acquisition. This research was funded by a Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (210924-190799) grant to V.T.

References

Abutalebi, J., Della Rosa, P. A., Green, D. W., Hernandez, M., Scifo, P., Keim, R., Cappa, S. R., & Costa, A. (2012). Bilingualism tunes the anterior cingulate cortex for conflict monitoring. Cerebral Cortex, 22 (9), 2076–2086. doi:10.1093/cercor/bhr287Google Scholar
Baddeley, A. (2003). Working memory: looking back and looking forward. Nature Reviews. Neuroscience, 4 (10), 829.Google Scholar
Badzakova-Trajkov, G. (2008). A behavioural and functional imaging investigation of Stroop task performance in late proficient bilinguals (Doctoral dissertation, ResearchSpace@Auckland).Google Scholar
Bain, B. (1975). Toward an integration of Piaget and Vygotsky: Bilingual considerations. Linguistics, 13 (160), 5–20.Google Scholar
Barac, R., Moreno, S., & Bialystok, E. (2016). Behavioural and electrophysiological differences in executive control between monolingual and bilingual children. Child Development, 87 (4), 1277–1290.Google Scholar
Bennys, K., Portet, F., Touchon, J., & Rondouin, G. (2007). Diagnostic value of event-related evoked potentials N200 and P300 subcomponents in early diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease and mild cognitive impairment. Journal of Clinical Neurophysiology, 24 (5), 405–412.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E. (2009). Bilingualism: The good, the bad, and the indifferent. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12 (1), 3–11.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., 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 (1), 40–49.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19 (2), 290.Google Scholar
Bialystok, E., & Martin, M. M. (2004). Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task. Developmental Science, 7 (3), 325–339.Google Scholar
Blom, E., Küntay, A. C., Messer, M., Verhagen, J., & Leseman, P. (2014). The benefits of being bilingual: Working memory in bilingual Turkish–Dutch children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 128, 105–119.Google Scholar
Bonifacci, P., Giombini, L., Bellocchi, S., & Contento, S. (2011). Speed of processing, anticipation, inhibition and working memory in bilinguals. Developmental Science, 14 (2), 256–269.Google Scholar
Daffner, K. R., Chong, H., Sun, X., Tarbi, E. C., Riis, J. L., McGinnis, S. M., & Holcomb, P. J. (2011). Mechanisms underlying age-and performance-related differences in working memory. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 23 (6), 1298–1314.Google Scholar
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.Google Scholar
Duñabeitia, J. A., Hernández, J. A., Antón, E., Macizo, P., Estévez, A., Fuentes, L. J., & Carreiras, M. (2014). The inhibitory advantage in bilingual children revisited. Experimental Psychology.Google Scholar
Engel de Abreu, P. M. (2011). Working memory in multilingual children: Is there a bilingual effect? Memory, 19 (5), 529–537.Google Scholar
Finnigan, S., O'Connell, R. G., Cummins, T. D., Broughton, M., & Robertson, I. H. (2011). ERP measures indicate both attention and working memory encoding decrements in aging. Psychophysiology, 48 (5), 601–611.Google Scholar
Folstein, J. R., & Van Petten, C. (2008). Influence of cognitive control and mismatch on the N2 component of the ERP: a review. Psychophysiology, 45 (1), 152–170.Google Scholar
Gathercole, V. C., Thomas, E. M., Kennedy, I., Prys, C., Young, N., Vinas Guasch, N., Roberts, E. J., Hughes, E. K., & Jones, L. (2014). Does language dominance affect cognitive performance in bilinguals? Lifespan evidence from preschoolers through older adults on card sorting, Simon, and metalinguistic tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 11. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00011Google Scholar
Gevins, A., Smith, M. E., Le, J., Leong, H., Bennett, J., Martin, N., McEvoy, L., Du., R., & Whitfield, S. (1996). High resolution evoked potential imaging of the cortical dynamics of human working memory. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 98 (4), 327–348.Google Scholar
Goldman, M. C., Negen, J., & Sarnecka, B. W. (2014). Are bilingual children better at ignoring perceptually misleading information? A novel test. Developmental Science, 17 (6), 956–964.Google Scholar
Grant, D. A., & Berg, E. (1948). A behavioral analysis of degree of reinforcement and ease of shifting to new responses in a Weigl-type card-sorting problem. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 38 (4), 404.Google Scholar
Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J. (2015). Language control and the neuroanatomy of bilingualism: in praise of variety. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 31 (3), 340–344.Google Scholar
Greenhouse, S. W., & Geisser, S. (1959). On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika, 24 (2), 95–112.Google Scholar
Grundy, J. G., Anderson, J. A., & Bialystok, E. (2017). Bilinguals have more complex EEG brain signals in occipital regions than monolinguals. NeuroImage, 159, 280–288.Google Scholar
Kaplan, E., Goodglass, H., Weintraub, S., & Segal, O. (1983). Boston Naming Test. Philadelphia: Lea & Febiger.Google Scholar
Kessler, C., & Quinn, M. E. (1987). Language minority children's linguistic and cognitive creativity. Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 8 (1-2), 173–186.Google Scholar
Kok, A. (2001). On the utility of P3 amplitude as a measure of processing capacity. Psychophysiology, 38 (3), 557–577.Google Scholar
Kousaie, S., & Phillips, N. A. (2012). Conflict monitoring and resolution: Are two languages better than one? Evidence from reaction time and event-related brain potentials. Brain Research, 1446, 71–90.Google Scholar
Kudo, M., & Swanson, H. L. (2014). Are there advantages for additive bilinguals in working memory tasks? Learning and Individual Differences, 35, 96–102.Google Scholar
Lijffijt, M., Lane, S. D., Meier, S. L., Boutros, N. N., Burroughs, S., Steinberg, J. L., Moeller, F. G., & Swann, A. C. (2009). P50, N100, and P200 sensory gating: relationships with behavioral inhibition, attention, and working memory. Psychophysiology, 46 (5), 1059–1068.Google Scholar
Luck, S. J. (2014). An Introduction to the Event-Related Potential Technique. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.Google Scholar
Mertens, R., & Polich, J. (1997). P300 from a single-stimulus paradigm: passive versus active tasks and stimulus modality. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology/Evoked Potentials Section, 104 (6), 488–497.Google Scholar
Morales, J., Calvo, A., & Bialystok, E. (2013). Working memory development in monolingual and bilingual children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 114 (2), 187–202.Google Scholar
Patel, S. H., & Azzam, P. N. (2005). Characterization of N200 and P300: selected studies of the event-related potential. International Journal of Medical Sciences, 2 (4), 147.Google Scholar
Peal, E., & Lambert, W. E. (1962). The relation of bilingualism to intelligence. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 76 (27), 1.Google Scholar
Perrin, F., Pernier, J., Bertrand, O., & Echallier, J. F. (1989). Spherical splines for scalp potential and current density mapping. Electroencephalography and Clinical Neurophysiology, 72 (2), 184–187.Google Scholar
Polich, J. (1996). Meta‐analysis of P300 normative aging studies. Psychophysiology, 33 (4), 334–353.Google Scholar
Polich, J. (2007). Updating P300: an integrative theory of P3a and P3b. Clinical Neurophysiology, 118 (10), 2128–2148.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 (4), 682–691.Google Scholar
Ratiu, I., & Azuma, T. (2014). Working memory capacity: Is there a bilingual advantage? Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 27 (1), 1–11.Google Scholar
Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 18 (6), 643.Google Scholar
Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler Memory Scale (WMS-III) (Vol. 14). San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar