Search

Abstract Previous studies have indicated that bilingualism may influence the efficiency of lexical access in adults. The goals of this research were (1) to compare bilingual and monolingual adults on [...]

While listening to non-native speech, second language users filter the auditory input through their native language. We examined how bilinguals perceived second language (L2 English) sound sequences that conflicted with native-language (L1 Spanish) constraints across three experiments with different task demands. We used the L1 Spanish phonotactic constraint (i.e., rule for combining speech sounds) that vowels must precede s+consonant clusters (e.g., Spanish: e stricto, "strict"). This L1 Spanish constraint may influence Spanish-English bilinguals' processing of L2 English words such as strict because of a missing initial vowel, as in e strict. We found that the extent to which bilinguals were influenced by the L1 during L2 processing depended on task demands. When metalinguistic awareness demands were low, as in the AX word discrimination task (Experiment 1), cross-linguistic effects were not observed. When metalinguistic awareness demands were high, as in the vowel detection (Experiment 2) and lexical decision (Experiment 3) tasks, response times demonstrated that bilinguals were influenced by the L1 constraint when processing L2 words beginning with an s+consonant. We conclude that bilinguals are cross-linguistically influenced by L1 phonotactic constraints during L2 processing when metalinguistic demands are higher, suggesting that L2 input may be mapped onto L1 sub-lexical representations during perception. These results extend previous research on language co-activation and speech perception by providing a more fine-grained understanding of task demands and elucidating when and where cross-linguistic phonotactic access is present during bilingual comprehension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: How health risks are communicated can have a substantial impact on medical judgments and choice. Here, we examine whether the language used to process health-related information systematically changes bilinguals' perceptions and preferences. Methodology: Chinese-English bilinguals were presented with 10 medical scenarios in either their native language (Mandarin Chinese; n = 76) or a second language (American English; n = 84) and made judgments regarding their familiarity with the medical conditions and the perceived severity of the possible symptoms (incurability, emotional distress, physical pain, social harm). Participants then rated their agreement with statements pertaining to beliefs about medical decision-making (trust in the good intentions of doctors, acceptability of challenging doctors, importance of involving family, preference for standard treatments, preference for experimental treatments). Data and analysis: Linear mixed-effects models were constructed for judgments of medical conditions and for beliefs regarding medical decision-making. Findings and conclusions: Medical conditions were perceived to be easier to cure, less physically painful, and less emotionally distressing when processed in the second language, English. Using English also increased endorsement of beliefs (such as challenging doctors' opinions and accepting experimental treatments) that were more consistent with individualistic than with collectivistic norms. We propose that the activation of emotions and values is linked to language, with consequences for how individuals make decisions that impact their health and well-being. Originality: The present study is among the first to systematically examine the interactive psychological impact of language context and experience on judgments and beliefs in an applied medical domain. Significance: With millions of practitioners and patients worldwide making medical decisions in a combination of native and non-native languages, the present findings highlight the need to account for language, including language use, context, and experience, in order to optimize health-related communication and judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The study of bilingualism has a history that extends from deciphering ancient multilingual texts to mapping the structure of the multilingual brain. The language experiences of individual bilinguals are equally diverse and characterized by unique contexts of acquisition and use that can shape not only sociocultural identity but also cognitive and neural function. Perhaps unsurprisingly, this variability in scholarly perspectives and language experiences has given rise to a range of methods for defining bilingualism. The goal of this article is to initiate a conversation about the utility of a more unified approach to how we think about, study, and measure bilingualism. Using concrete case studies, we illustrate the value of enhancing communication and streamlining terminology across researchers with different methodologies within questions, different questions within domains, and different domains within scientific inquiry. We specifically consider the utility and feasibility of a bilingualism quotient (BQ) construct, discuss the idea of a BQ relative to the well-established intelligence quotient, and include recommendations for next steps. We conclude that though the variability in language backgrounds and approaches to defining bilingualism presents significant challenges, concerted efforts to systematize and synthesize research across the field may enable the construction of a valid and generalizable index of multilingual experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Bilingualism: Language & Cognition is the property of Cambridge University Press and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Vocabulary acquisition is a critical part of learning a new language. Yet, due to structural, historical, and individual variability associated with natural languages, isolating the impact of specific factors on word learning can be challenging. Artificial languages are versatile tools for addressing this problem, allowing researchers to systematically manipulate properties of the language and control for learners' past experiences. Here, we review how artificial languages have been used to study bilingual word learning, with a particular focus on the influences of language input (e.g., word properties) and language experience (e.g., bilingualism). We additionally discuss the advantages and limitations of artificial languages for bilingual research and suggest resources for researchers considering the use of artificial languages. Used and interpreted properly, artificial language studies can inform our understanding of a wide range of factors relevant to word learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Understanding speech often involves processing input from multiple modalities. The availability of visual information may make auditory input less critical for comprehension. This study examines whether the auditory system is sensitive to the presence of complementary sources of input when exerting top-down control over the amplification of speech stimuli. Method: Auditory gain in the cochlea was assessed by monitoring spontaneous otoacoustic emissions (SOAEs), which are by-products of the amplification process. SOAEs were recorded while 32 participants (23women, ninemen; Mage = 21.13) identified speech sounds such as "ba" and "ga." The speech sounds were presented either alone or with complementary visual input, as well as in quiet or with 6-talker babble. Results: Analyses revealed that there was a greater reduction in the amplification of noisy auditory stimuli compared with quiet. This reduced amplification may aid in the perception of speech by improving the signal-to-noise ratio. Critically, there was a greater reduction in amplification when speech sounds were presented bimodally with visual information relative to when they were presented unimodally. This effect was evidenced by greater changes in SOAE levels from baseline to stimuli presentation in audiovisual trials relative to audio-only trials. Conclusions: The results suggest that even the earliest stages of speech comprehension are modulated by topdown influences, resulting in changes to SOAEs depending on the presence of bimodal or unimodal input. Neural processes responsible for changes in cochlear function are sensitive to redundancy across auditory and visual input channels and coordinate activity to maximize efficiency in the auditory periphery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]