20
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Differences in Language Exposure and its Effects on Memory Flexibility in Monolingual, Bilingual, and Trilingual Infants

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisher
      Bookmark
          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

          Bilingual advantages in memory flexibility, indexed using a memory generalization task, have been reported (Brito & Barr, 2012; 2014), and the present study examines what factors may influence memory performance. The first experiment examines the role of language similarity; bilingual 18-month-old infants exposed to two similar languages (Spanish–Catalan) or two more different (English–Spanish) languages were tested on a memory generalization task and compared to monolingual 18-month-olds. The second experiment compares performance by trilingual 18-month-olds to monolingual and bilingual infants’ performance from the first experiment. The bilingual advantage in memory flexibility was robust; both bilingual groups outperformed the monolingual groups, with no significant differences between bilingual groups. Interestingly, an advantage was not found for infants exposed to three languages. These findings demonstrate early emerging differences in memory flexibility, and have important implications for our understanding of how early environmental variations shape the trajectory of memory development.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The development of executive functioning and theory of mind. A comparison of Chinese and U.S. preschoolers.

          Preschoolers' theory-of-mind development follows a similar age trajectory across many cultures. To determine whether these similarities are related to similar underlying ontogenetic processes, we examined whether the relation between theory of mind and executive function commonly found among U.S. preschoolers is also present among Chinese preschoolers. Preschoolers from Beijing, China (N= 109), were administered theory-of-mind and executive-functioning tasks, and their performance was compared with that of a previously studied sample of U.S. preschoolers (N= 107). The Chinese preschoolers outperformed their U.S. counterparts on all measures of executive functioning, but were not similarly advanced in theory-of-mind reasoning. Nonetheless, individual differences in executive functioning predicted theory of mind for children in both cultures. Thus, the relation between executive functioning and theory of mind is robust across two disparate cultures. These findings shed light on why executive functioning is important for theory-of-mind development.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Interactions between attention and memory.

            Attention and memory cannot operate without each other. In this review, we discuss two lines of recent evidence that support this interdependence. First, memory has a limited capacity, and thus attention determines what will be encoded. Division of attention during encoding prevents the formation of conscious memories, although the role of attention in formation of unconscious memories is more complex. Such memories can be encoded even when there is another concurrent task, but the stimuli that are to be encoded must be selected from among other competing stimuli. Second, memory from past experience guides what should be attended. Brain areas that are important for memory, such as the hippocampus and medial temporal lobe structures, are recruited in attention tasks, and memory directly affects frontal-parietal networks involved in spatial orienting. Thus, exploring the interactions between attention and memory can provide new insights into these fundamental topics of cognitive neuroscience.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Executive function and theory of mind in 2 year olds: a family affair?

              Although numerous studies of preschoolers report robust associations between performance on tests of executive function (EF) and theory of mind (ToM), a lack of developmentally appropriate tasks so far has limited research on these cognitive skills in younger children. Here, we present new batteries of EF and ToM tasks that were administered to 140 two-year-olds from predominantly disadvantaged families, with analyses based on 129 children. Our results showed a strong association between EF and ToM, which remained significant when effects of verbal ability were controlled. Individual differences in EF and ToM were also examined in relation to both distal family factors (social disadvantage, number of siblings) and proximal family factors (quality of child's relationships with parents and siblings). Social disadvantage predicted significant variance in both EF and ToM but did not contribute to the association between these domains. Associations between positive parent-child relationships and both EF and ToM were nonsignificant when verbal ability was controlled. In contrast, positive sibling relationships predicted significant variance in ToM, even controlling for age, verbal ability, EF, social disadvantage, and parent-child relationships.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                applab
                Bilingualism: Language and Cognition
                Bilingualism
                Cambridge University Press (CUP)
                1366-7289
                1469-1841
                October 2015
                November 11 2014
                : 18
                : 04
                : 670-682
                Article
                10.1017/S1366728914000789
                368ddfb3-d533-4e61-97c3-ca66ed8fbf52
                © 2014
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article