{"title":"口译员在执行功能上的优势——一个系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Minxia Hu, Wenjia Fan","doi":"10.18063/fls.v3i1.1251","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Given the heavy cognitive load inherent in language interpreting, interpreters may develop cognitive advantages from managing frequent switching of linguistic codes and working modes. Based on a systematic review of executive functions of inhibiting, shifting and working memory (WM) updating by Nour et al. (2020) and meta-analysis of working memory by Wen and Dong (2019) and Mellinger and Hanson (2019), this research follows the PICOS framework and the PRISMA guideline to synthesize findings from 98 tasks of 29 original studies from International and Chinese databases with a cut-off date of 1st October, 2020. Substantial evidence for an interpreter advantage in shifting was found, but not for inhibition or updating. The meta-analysis showed 1) a moderate to high effect in shifting (g = 0.68, seven WCST effects; g = -0.32, eight switching cost effects); 2) no effect in inhibiting (g = 0.13, six Stroop effects); 3) mixed effects in WM updating. Subgroup analysis on WM updating revealed significant training effects from within-group comparisons (g = 0.58, five 2-back effects; g = 0.71, two L2 listening span effects), but insignificant difference from between-group comparisons (g = -0.03 , five 2-back effects; g = 0.18, five L2 listening span effects ). More reproducible behavioral research with scientific and consistent designs is needed for a clearer understanding of the relationship between interpreting experience and EFs.","PeriodicalId":285689,"journal":{"name":"Forum for Linguistic Studies","volume":"44 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The interpreter advantage in executive functions—A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Minxia Hu, Wenjia Fan\",\"doi\":\"10.18063/fls.v3i1.1251\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Given the heavy cognitive load inherent in language interpreting, interpreters may develop cognitive advantages from managing frequent switching of linguistic codes and working modes. Based on a systematic review of executive functions of inhibiting, shifting and working memory (WM) updating by Nour et al. (2020) and meta-analysis of working memory by Wen and Dong (2019) and Mellinger and Hanson (2019), this research follows the PICOS framework and the PRISMA guideline to synthesize findings from 98 tasks of 29 original studies from International and Chinese databases with a cut-off date of 1st October, 2020. Substantial evidence for an interpreter advantage in shifting was found, but not for inhibition or updating. The meta-analysis showed 1) a moderate to high effect in shifting (g = 0.68, seven WCST effects; g = -0.32, eight switching cost effects); 2) no effect in inhibiting (g = 0.13, six Stroop effects); 3) mixed effects in WM updating. Subgroup analysis on WM updating revealed significant training effects from within-group comparisons (g = 0.58, five 2-back effects; g = 0.71, two L2 listening span effects), but insignificant difference from between-group comparisons (g = -0.03 , five 2-back effects; g = 0.18, five L2 listening span effects ). More reproducible behavioral research with scientific and consistent designs is needed for a clearer understanding of the relationship between interpreting experience and EFs.\",\"PeriodicalId\":285689,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Forum for Linguistic Studies\",\"volume\":\"44 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-09-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Forum for Linguistic Studies\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.18063/fls.v3i1.1251\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Forum for Linguistic Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.18063/fls.v3i1.1251","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
摘要
鉴于语言口译固有的巨大认知负荷,口译人员可以通过管理语言代码和工作模式的频繁切换来发展认知优势。本研究基于Nour et al.(2020)对抑制、转移和工作记忆(WM)更新执行功能的系统综述,Wen and Dong(2019)和Mellinger and Hanson(2019)对工作记忆的元分析,遵循PICOS框架和PRISMA指南,综合了来自国际和中国数据库的29项原始研究的98项任务的结果,截止日期为2020年10月1日。大量证据表明译员在转移方面有优势,但在抑制或更新方面没有优势。荟萃分析显示:1)转移有中高效应(g = 0.68, 7个WCST效应;G = -0.32, 8个转换成本效应);2)无抑制作用(g = 0.13, 6个Stroop效应);3) WM更新中的混合效果。WM更新的亚组分析显示组内比较的训练效应显著(g = 0.58, 5个2-back效应;g = 0.71,两种L2听力跨度效应),但组间比较差异不显著(g = -0.03,五种2-back效应;g = 0.18,五种二语听力跨度效应)。为了更清楚地理解解释经验和电磁场之间的关系,需要更多具有科学和一致设计的可重复性行为研究。
The interpreter advantage in executive functions—A systematic review and meta-analysis
Given the heavy cognitive load inherent in language interpreting, interpreters may develop cognitive advantages from managing frequent switching of linguistic codes and working modes. Based on a systematic review of executive functions of inhibiting, shifting and working memory (WM) updating by Nour et al. (2020) and meta-analysis of working memory by Wen and Dong (2019) and Mellinger and Hanson (2019), this research follows the PICOS framework and the PRISMA guideline to synthesize findings from 98 tasks of 29 original studies from International and Chinese databases with a cut-off date of 1st October, 2020. Substantial evidence for an interpreter advantage in shifting was found, but not for inhibition or updating. The meta-analysis showed 1) a moderate to high effect in shifting (g = 0.68, seven WCST effects; g = -0.32, eight switching cost effects); 2) no effect in inhibiting (g = 0.13, six Stroop effects); 3) mixed effects in WM updating. Subgroup analysis on WM updating revealed significant training effects from within-group comparisons (g = 0.58, five 2-back effects; g = 0.71, two L2 listening span effects), but insignificant difference from between-group comparisons (g = -0.03 , five 2-back effects; g = 0.18, five L2 listening span effects ). More reproducible behavioral research with scientific and consistent designs is needed for a clearer understanding of the relationship between interpreting experience and EFs.