Bilingual and monolingual adults learning an additional language: ERPs reveal differences in syntactic processing

There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

Abstract

It has been suggested that bilinguals learn additional languages ‘better’ than monolinguals. However, evidence is sparse, particularly for grammar. We examined behavioral and neural correlates of learning an additional (artificial) language in early Mandarin–English bilinguals, compared to English monolinguals. Following grammar instruction, participants practiced comprehension and production, and judged grammaticality at low and high proficiency while event-related potentials (ERPs) were acquired. Bilinguals and monolinguals did not differ on behavioral measures, but showed distinct ERP patterns. At low proficiency only bilinguals showed a P600, a common ERP correlate of syntactic processing in native speakers of languages. At high proficiency both groups showed P600s, though the monolinguals also evidenced an anterior positivity not typically found in native speakers of languages during syntactic processing. These findings suggest that, even without bilingual/monolingual behavioral differences, bilinguals show ERP patterns for an additional language that are more similar to those of native speakers of languages.

Related collections

Most cited references 54

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

Bilingualism, aging, and cognitive control: evidence from the Simon task.

Ellen Bialystok, Fergus I M Craik, Raymond W. Klein … (2004)

Previous work has shown that bilingualism is associated with more effective controlled processing in children; the assumption is that the constant management of 2 competing languages enhances executive functions (E. Bialystok, 2001). The present research attempted to determine whether this bilingual advantage persists for adults and whether bilingualism attenuates the negative effects of aging on cognitive control in older adults. Three studies are reported that compared the performance of monolingual and bilingual middle-aged and older adults on the Simon task. Bilingualism was associated with smaller Simon effect costs for both age groups; bilingual participants also responded more rapidly to conditions that placed greater demands on working memory. In all cases the bilingual advantage was greater for older participants. It appears, therefore, that controlled processing is carried out more effectively by bilinguals and that bilingualism helps to offset age-related losses in certain executive processes. ((c) 2004 APA, all rights reserved)

0 comments Cited 346 times – based on 0 reviews      Review now

Bookmark

Record: found
Abstract: found
Article: not found

How to get statistically significant effects in any ERP experiment (and why you shouldn't).

Steven J. Luck, Nicholas Gaspelin (2017)

ERP experiments generate massive datasets, often containing thousands of values for each participant, even after averaging. The richness of these datasets can be very useful in testing sophisticated hypotheses, but this richness also creates many opportunities to obtain effects that are statistically significant but do not reflect true differences among groups or conditions (bogus effects). The purpose of this paper is to demonstrate how common and seemingly innocuous methods for quantifying and analyzing ERP effects can lead to very high rates of significant but bogus effects, with the likelihood of obtaining at least one such bogus effect exceeding 50% in many experiments. We focus on two specific problems: using the grand-averaged data to select the time windows and electrode sites for quantifying component amplitudes and latencies, and using one or more multifactor statistical analyses. Reanalyses of prior data and simulations of typical experimental designs are used to show how these problems can greatly increase the likelihood of significant but bogus results. Several strategies are described for avoiding these problems and for increasing the likelihood that significant effects actually reflect true differences among groups or conditions.