Search

Language brokering has been correlated with positive cognitive advantages, particularly in the younger years of translation. However, heavy translating has also been correlated with greater levels of psychological maladjustment. Fortunately, a cultural emphasis on family may reduce the adverse effects of translating. The current study examined emerging adults' psychological health in relation to their language brokering habits during adolescence, as moderated by the strength of interdependent and independent values in the family. It was predicted that a strong sense of familism, or a high value placed on the family, would moderate the adverse psychological effects of language brokering. It was found that at low levels of "familism," being a language broker was linked with a greater presence of anxiety symptoms. However, when familism was high, this value acted as a protective factor for the brokers. When examining depression symptoms, a strong connection to mainstream values was linked with less depression symptoms. Overall, these results suggest that a connectedness to both cultures may be beneficial to the adjustment of language brokers.

This study explored differences in sustained top‐down attentional control (i.e., proactive control) and spontaneous types of control (i.e., reactive control) in bilingual and monolingual speakers. We modified a Color‐Word Stroop task to varying levels of conflict and included switching trials in addition to more "traditional" inhibition Stroop conditions. The task was administered during scalp electroencephalography (EEG) to evaluate the temporal course of cognitive control during trials. The behavioral Stroop effect was observed across the whole sample; however, there were no differences in accuracy or response time between the bilingual and monolingual groups. Event‐related potentials (ERPs) were calculated for the N200, N450, and conflict Sustained Potential (SP). On the pure‐blocked incongruent trials, the bilingual group displayed reduced signal during interference suppression (N450) and increased later signal, as indexed by the conflict SP. On the mixed‐block incongruent trials, both the bilinguals and monolinguals displayed increased later signal at the conflict SP. This suggests that proactive control may be a default mode for bilinguals on tasks requiring inhibition. In the switching trials, that place high demands on the executive control component of shifting, the language groups did not differ. Overall, these results suggest processing differences between bilinguals and monolinguals extend beyond early response inhibition processes. Greater integration of proactive and reactive control may be needed to sort conflicting language environments for bilinguals, which may be transferring to domain‐general mechanisms. This ERP study advances the literature on bilingual and monolingual processing of conflicting stimuli by demonstrating that language group differences extend beyond initial response inhibition processes. Bilinguals defaulted to greater proactive control activity on the inhibition trials of a Stroop task, which facilitated reductions in interference suppression. A greater integration of proactive and reactive control may be needed to sort conflicting language environments for bilinguals, which may be transferring to domain‐general mechanisms. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]