Freeman Max R, Robinson Anthony Jonathan J D, Marian Viorica, Blumenfeld Henrike K
Language Acquisition and Bilingualism Lab, Department of Communication Sciences and Disorders, St. John's College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, St. John's University, Jamaica, NY, United States.
Bilingualism and Cognition Laboratory, School of Speech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, College of Health and Human Services, San Diego State University, San Diego, CA, United States.
Front Commun (Lausanne). 2022;7. doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2022.865965. Epub 2022 May 11.
To examine how differences in language experience and sociolinguistic context impact cognitive control, 146 Spanish-English bilingual participants were tested on a non-linguistic Stroop arrows task. Dimensions of language experience included a continuum of L2 proficiency, exposure, age of L2 acquisition, and English receptive vocabulary, along with cognitive non-verbal reasoning. Sociolinguistic context varied with more exposure to Spanish for participants in Southern California (SoCal) than in the Midwest. The task involved perceptual stimulus-stimulus conflict within stimulus features (e.g., right-pointing arrow on the left side of a display). Reaction times to trials where arrow location and direction matched (congruent), mismatched (incongruent), or arrow location was centered (neutral) were used to calculate Stroop (incongruent-congruent), facilitation (neutral-congruent), and inhibition (incongruent-neutral) effects. When examining performance on a continuum of bilingual language experience, individual differences in linguistic background (i.e., L2 proficiency and exposure, receptive vocabulary) and cognitive abilities (i.e., non-verbal reasoning abilities) predicted more efficient performance on the Stroop task. Across sociolinguistic contexts, findings revealed better performance via smaller Stroop and facilitation effects in the Midwest than in SoCal, and no group difference on the inhibition effect. We conclude that research on the cognitive consequences of bilingualism must consider a continuum of language experiences and must be situated in broader naturalistic contexts that take into account the sociolinguistic environments of language use.
为了研究语言经历和社会语言环境的差异如何影响认知控制，146名西班牙裔-英语双语参与者接受了一项非语言的斯特鲁普箭头任务测试。语言经历的维度包括第二语言（L2）熟练程度、接触程度、第二语言习得年龄、英语接受性词汇量的连续统一体，以及认知非语言推理能力。社会语言环境有所不同，南加州（SoCal）的参与者比中西部的参与者更多地接触西班牙语。该任务涉及刺激特征内的感知刺激-刺激冲突（例如，显示屏左侧的右指箭头）。对箭头位置和方向匹配（一致）、不匹配（不一致）或箭头位置居中（中性）的试验的反应时间用于计算斯特鲁普效应（不一致-一致）、促进效应（中性-一致）和抑制效应（不一致-中性）。在研究双语语言经历连续统一体上的表现时，语言背景（即第二语言熟练程度和接触程度、接受性词汇量）和认知能力（即非语言推理能力）的个体差异预测了在斯特鲁普任务上更高效的表现。在不同的社会语言环境中，研究结果显示，中西部地区的斯特鲁普效应和促进效应比南加州地区更小，表现更好，并且在抑制效应上没有群体差异。我们得出结论，关于双语认知后果的研究必须考虑语言经历的连续统一体，并且必须置于更广泛的自然主义背景中，并考虑语言使用的社会语言环境。
