Export file:

Format

  • RIS(for EndNote,Reference Manager,ProCite)
  • BibTex
  • Text

Content

  • Citation Only
  • Citation and Abstract

Speaking Two Languages Enhances an Auditory but Not a Visual Neural Marker of Cognitive Inhibition

Division of Social and Behavioral Sciences, Nova Southeastern University, Ft. Lauderdale, FL, 33314 USA

Special Issues: What are the mechanisms that occur in the brain that lead to the cognitive benefits of bilingualism and enriched environments?

The purpose of the present study was to replicate and extend our original findings of enhanced neural inhibitory control in bilinguals. We compared English monolinguals to Spanish/English bilinguals on a non-linguistic, auditory Go/NoGo task while recording event-related brain potentials. New to this study was the visual Go/NoGo task, which we included to investigate whether enhanced neural inhibition in bilinguals extends from the auditory to the visual modality. Results confirmed our original findings and revealed greater inhibition in bilinguals compared to monolinguals. As predicted, compared to monolinguals, bilinguals showed increased N2 amplitude during the auditory NoGo trials, which required inhibitory control, but no differences during the Go trials, which required a behavioral response and no inhibition. Interestingly, during the visual Go/NoGo task, event related brain potentials did not distinguish the two groups, and behavioral responses were similar between the groups regardless of task modality. Thus, only auditory trials that required inhibitory control revealed between-group differences indicative of greater neural inhibition in bilinguals. These results show that experience-dependent neural changes associated with bilingualism are specific to the auditory modality and that the N2 event-related brain potential is a sensitive marker of this plasticity.
  Figure/Table
  Supplementary
  Article Metrics

Keywords bilingualism; inhibition; event-related brain potentials; N2; executive function

Citation: Mercedes Fernandez, Juliana Acosta, Kevin Douglass, Nikita Doshi, Jaime L. Tartar. Speaking Two Languages Enhances an Auditory but Not a Visual Neural Marker of Cognitive Inhibition. AIMS Neuroscience, 2014, 1(2): 145-157. doi: 10.3934/Neuroscience.2014.2.145

References

  • 1. Abutalebi J, Della Rosa PA, Green DQ, et al. (2012). Bilingualism tunes the anterior cingulate cortex for conflict monitoring. Cereb Cortex 22(9): 2076-2086.    
  • 2. Abutalebi J, Canini M, Della Rosa PA, et al. (2014). Bilingualism protects anterior temporal lobe integrity in aging. Neurobiol Aging 35(9): 2126-2133.    
  • 3. Gold BT, Johnson NF, Powell DK. (2013). Lifelong bilingualism contributes to cognitive reserve against white matter integrity declines in aging. Neuropsychologia 51(13): 2841-2846.    
  • 4. Bialystok E, Craik FIM, Green DW, et al. (2009). Bilingual minds. Psychol Sci Public Interest10(3): 89-129.
  • 5. Hilchey MD, Klein RM. (2011). Are there bilingual advantages on nonlinguistic interference tasks? Implications for the plasticity of executive control processes. Psychon B Rev 18: 625-658.
  • 6. Paap KR, Greenberg ZL. (2013). There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cogn Psychol 66(2): 232-258.    
  • 7. Green DW. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Lang Cogn 1(2): 67-81.    
  • 8. Bialystok E, Martin MM. (2004). Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task. Dev Sci 7(3): 325-339.    
  • 9. Fernandez M, Tartar JL, Padron D, et al. (2013). Neurophysiological marker of inhibition distinguishes language groups on nonlinguistic executive function test. Brain Cogn 83: 330-336.    
  • 10. Falkenstein M, Hoormann J, Hohnsbein J. (1999). ERP components in Go/NoGo tasks and their relation to inhibition. Acta Psychol 101(2-3): 267-291.    
  • 11. Falkenstein M, Hoormann J, Hohnsbein J. (2002). Inhibition-related ERP components: Variations with modality, age, and time-on-task. J Psychophysiol 16(3): 167-175.    
  • 12. Kousaie S, Phillips NA. (2012). Conflict monitoring and resolution: Are two languages better than one? Evidence from reaction time and event-related brain potentials. Brain Res 1446: 71-90.
  • 13. Luk G, Anderson JAE, Craik FIM, et al. (2010) Distinct neural correlates for two types of inhibition in bilinguals: response inhibition versus interference suppression. Brain Cogn 74:347-357.    
  • 14. Krizman J, Marian V, Shook A, et al. (2012) Subcortical encoding of sound is enhanced in bilinguals and relates to executive function advantages. Proc Natl Acad Sci 109(20): 7877-7881.
  • 15. Munoz-Sandoval AF, Cummins J, Alvarado CG, et al. (1998). Bilingual verbal ability test: Comprehensive manual. Itasca: Riverside Publishing.
  • 16. Wechsler D. (2008) Wechsler adult intelligence scale. 4th Ed (WAIS IV). San Antonio: Psychological Corporation.
  • 17. Mao YT, Pallas SL. (2013) Cross0modal plasticity results in increased inhibition in primary auditory cortical areas. Neural Plast 2013. doi:10. 1155/2013/530651.
  • 18. Chittajallu R, Isaac JTR. (2010). Emergence of cortical inhibition by coordinated sensory-driven plasticity at distinct synaptic loci. Nat Neurosci 13(10). doi:10. 1038/nn. 2369.
  • 19. Bak T, Nissan JJ, Allerhand MM, et al. (2014). Does bilingualism in fluence cognitive aging? Ann Neurol 75(6): 959-963.    
  • 20. Chambers CD, Garavan H, Bellgrove MA. (2009). Insights into the neural basis of response inhibition from cognitive and clinical neuroscience. Neurosci Biobehav Res 33(5): 631-646.    
  • 21. Lustig C, Hasher L, Zacks R. (2007). Inhibitory deficit theory: Recent developments in a “new view”. In: MacLeod CW, Gorfein CD. Inhibition in cognition. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association. ERPs to the first stimulus in the auditory and visual modality.
  • 22. Yi Y, Friedman D. (2014). Age-related differences in working memory: ERPs reveal age-related delays in selection- and inhibition-related processes. Neuropsychol Dev Cogn B Aging Neuropsychol Cogn 21(4): 483-513.    

 

This article has been cited by

  • 1. John G. Grundy, John A.E. Anderson, Ellen Bialystok, Neural correlates of cognitive processing in monolinguals and bilinguals, Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 2017, 10.1111/nyas.13333
  • 2. Kenneth R. Paap, Hunter A. Johnson, Oliver Sawi, Bilingual advantages in executive functioning either do not exist or are restricted to very specific and undetermined circumstances, Cortex, 2015, 69, 265, 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.04.014
  • 3. , , Handbook of Social Status Correlates, 2018, 307, 10.1016/B978-0-12-805371-3.16001-7
  • 4. Cristina Barbu, Sarah Orban, Sophie Gillet, Martine Poncelet, The Impact of Language Switching Frequency on Attentional and Executive Functioning in Proficient Bilingual Adults, Psychologica Belgica, 2018, 58, 1, 115, 10.5334/pb.392
  • 5. Victor A. Sanchez-Azanza, Raúl López-Penadés, Daniel Adrover-Roig, More similitudes than differences between bilinguals and monolinguals on speeded and demand-varying executive tasks, Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 2019, 1, 10.1080/23273798.2019.1706752
  • 6. Lu Jiao, John G. Grundy, Cong Liu, Baoguo Chen, Language context modulates executive control in bilinguals: Evidence from language production, Neuropsychologia, 2020, 107441, 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2020.107441

Reader Comments

your name: *   your email: *  

Copyright Info: 2014, Mercedes Fernandez, et al., licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Licese (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)

Download full text in PDF

Export Citation

Copyright © AIMS Press All Rights Reserved