New insights on what leads bilinguals to be able to name some pictures only in their nondominant language: Immersion, dominance reversal, and balanced bilingualism.

IF 2.6 4区 心理学 Q2 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-19 DOI:10.1017/S1355617724000067
Anne Neveu, Tamar H Gollan
{"title":"New insights on what leads bilinguals to be able to name some pictures only in their nondominant language: Immersion, dominance reversal, and balanced bilingualism.","authors":"Anne Neveu, Tamar H Gollan","doi":"10.1017/S1355617724000067","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study asked if bilinguals who are immersed in their nondominant language are more likely to know some words only in their nondominant language.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>The either-language scoring benefit (ELSB) reflects how many more points bilinguals get when credited for pictures named regardless of which language is used. We asked if the ELSB varies with self-rated proficiency level of the nondominant language in young English-dominant (<i>n</i> = 68) compared to Spanish-dominant (<i>n</i> = 33) bilinguals, and in older English-dominant (<i>n</i> = 36) compared to Spanish-dominant (<i>n</i> = 32) bilinguals. All bilinguals were immersed in English (in the USA) at the time of testing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Spanish-dominant bilinguals showed a larger ELSB than English-dominant bilinguals (in both young and older groups), but simple correlations showed that the degree of Spanish dominance was associated with a higher ELSB only in young bilinguals. Additionally, the ELSB was larger for bilinguals with more years of immersion and for more balanced bilinguals, whether measured by naming scores or self-rated balance (in both age groups). Nearly half (<i>n</i> = 14/33) of the young bilinguals who said they were Spanish-dominant scored higher in English than in Spanish, and on average these participants had similar naming scores in English and Spanish.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Either-language scoring benefits bilinguals with higher proficiency level in the nondominant language, which is more likely in bilinguals with extended immersion in the nondominant language, who also tend to be more balanced bilinguals, and for young adult bilinguals who may be in the process of a switch in which language is dominant.</p>","PeriodicalId":49995,"journal":{"name":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11331018/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S1355617724000067","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/19 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The present study asked if bilinguals who are immersed in their nondominant language are more likely to know some words only in their nondominant language.

Method: The either-language scoring benefit (ELSB) reflects how many more points bilinguals get when credited for pictures named regardless of which language is used. We asked if the ELSB varies with self-rated proficiency level of the nondominant language in young English-dominant (n = 68) compared to Spanish-dominant (n = 33) bilinguals, and in older English-dominant (n = 36) compared to Spanish-dominant (n = 32) bilinguals. All bilinguals were immersed in English (in the USA) at the time of testing.

Results: Spanish-dominant bilinguals showed a larger ELSB than English-dominant bilinguals (in both young and older groups), but simple correlations showed that the degree of Spanish dominance was associated with a higher ELSB only in young bilinguals. Additionally, the ELSB was larger for bilinguals with more years of immersion and for more balanced bilinguals, whether measured by naming scores or self-rated balance (in both age groups). Nearly half (n = 14/33) of the young bilinguals who said they were Spanish-dominant scored higher in English than in Spanish, and on average these participants had similar naming scores in English and Spanish.

Conclusions: Either-language scoring benefits bilinguals with higher proficiency level in the nondominant language, which is more likely in bilinguals with extended immersion in the nondominant language, who also tend to be more balanced bilinguals, and for young adult bilinguals who may be in the process of a switch in which language is dominant.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
关于导致双语者只能用非主导语言说出某些图片名称的新见解:沉浸、优势逆转和平衡双语。
研究目的本研究的目的是探究浸泡在非主导语言环境中的双语者是否更有可能只用非主导语言认识一些单词:任何一种语言的得分优势(ELSB)反映了双语者无论使用哪种语言都能在图片命名时多得到多少分。我们调查了英语为主的年轻双语者(68人)与西班牙语为主的双语者(33人)相比,以及英语为主的年长双语者(36人)与西班牙语为主的双语者(32人)相比,ELSB是否会随自我评价的非主导语言熟练程度而变化。所有双语者在测试时都浸泡在英语环境中(在美国):结果:西班牙语主导型双语者的 ELSB 比英语主导型双语者大(年轻组和年长组),但简单相关性表明,只有年轻双语者的西班牙语主导程度与较高的 ELSB 相关。此外,浸泡年限越长的双语者,其 ELSB 越大,双语平衡程度越高的双语者,无论是通过命名得分还是自我平衡评价来衡量,其 ELSB 都越大(两个年龄组均是如此)。在自称以西班牙语为主的年轻双语者中,近一半(n = 14/33)的英语得分高于西班牙语,平均而言,这些参与者的英语和西班牙语命名得分相近:任选一种语言计分有利于非主导语言熟练程度较高的双语者,这更有可能发生在长期浸泡在非主导语言环境中的双语者身上,他们也往往是更加平衡的双语者,以及可能正在转换主导语言的年轻成年双语者身上。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.40
自引率
3.80%
发文量
185
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society is the official journal of the International Neuropsychological Society, an organization of over 4,500 international members from a variety of disciplines. The Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society welcomes original, creative, high quality research papers covering all areas of neuropsychology. The focus of articles may be primarily experimental, applied, or clinical. Contributions will broadly reflect the interest of all areas of neuropsychology, including but not limited to: development of cognitive processes, brain-behavior relationships, adult and pediatric neuropsychology, neurobehavioral syndromes (such as aphasia or apraxia), and the interfaces of neuropsychology with related areas such as behavioral neurology, neuropsychiatry, genetics, and cognitive neuroscience. Papers that utilize behavioral, neuroimaging, and electrophysiological measures are appropriate. To assure maximum flexibility and to promote diverse mechanisms of scholarly communication, the following formats are available in addition to a Regular Research Article: Brief Communication is a shorter research article; Rapid Communication is intended for "fast breaking" new work that does not yet justify a full length article and is placed on a fast review track; Case Report is a theoretically important and unique case study; Critical Review and Short Review are thoughtful considerations of topics of importance to neuropsychology and include meta-analyses; Dialogue provides a forum for publishing two distinct positions on controversial issues in a point-counterpoint format; Special Issue and Special Section consist of several articles linked thematically; Letter to the Editor responds to recent articles published in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society; and Book Review, which is considered but is no longer solicited.
期刊最新文献
Adherence to high-frequency ecological momentary assessment in persons with moderate-to-severe traumatic brain injury. The Grenada Learning and Memory Scale: Psychometric features and normative data in Caribbean preschool children. Beyond brain injury: Examining the neuropsychological and psychosocial sequelae of post-traumatic epilepsy. Psychometric and adherence considerations for high-frequency, smartphone-based cognitive screening protocols in older adults. Comparing and linking the Mini-Mental State Examination and Montreal Cognitive Assessment in the Amsterdam Dementia Cohort
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1