使用两种语言时的双重任务:研究双语者对提示语言和自愿语言生产的认知资源需求。

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q4 PHYSIOLOGY Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Pub Date : 2024-03-01 Epub Date: 2023-05-18 DOI:10.1177/17470218231173638
Angela de Bruin, Ronan McGarrigle
{"title":"使用两种语言时的双重任务:研究双语者对提示语言和自愿语言生产的认知资源需求。","authors":"Angela de Bruin, Ronan McGarrigle","doi":"10.1177/17470218231173638","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The way bilinguals switch languages can differ depending on the context. In cued dual-language environments, bilinguals select a language in response to environmental cues (e.g., a monolingual conversation partner). In voluntary dual-language environments, bilinguals communicating with people who speak the same languages can use their languages more freely. The control demands of these types of language-production contexts, and the costs of language switches, have been argued to differ (Adaptive Control Hypothesis). Here, we used a dual-task paradigm to examine how cued and voluntary bilingual production differ in cognitive resources used. Forty Mandarin-English bilinguals completed two language-switching paradigms as the primary task; one in response to cues and one while using two languages freely. At the same time, they also had to respond to the pitch of tones (secondary task). Response times (RTs) on the secondary task, as well as naming times on the primary task, were shorter under the voluntary- than cued-naming condition. Task workload ratings were also higher under the cued- than voluntary-naming condition. This suggests more attentional resources are needed in a cued-naming context to monitor cues and select languages accordingly. However, the costs associated with switching from one language to the other were similar in both voluntary- and cued-naming contexts. Thus, while cued-naming might be more effortful overall, cued and voluntary <i>switching</i> recruited similar levels of cognitive resources.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"461-477"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10880414/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dual-tasking while using two languages: Examining the cognitive resource demands of cued and voluntary language production in bilinguals.\",\"authors\":\"Angela de Bruin, Ronan McGarrigle\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17470218231173638\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The way bilinguals switch languages can differ depending on the context. In cued dual-language environments, bilinguals select a language in response to environmental cues (e.g., a monolingual conversation partner). In voluntary dual-language environments, bilinguals communicating with people who speak the same languages can use their languages more freely. The control demands of these types of language-production contexts, and the costs of language switches, have been argued to differ (Adaptive Control Hypothesis). Here, we used a dual-task paradigm to examine how cued and voluntary bilingual production differ in cognitive resources used. Forty Mandarin-English bilinguals completed two language-switching paradigms as the primary task; one in response to cues and one while using two languages freely. At the same time, they also had to respond to the pitch of tones (secondary task). Response times (RTs) on the secondary task, as well as naming times on the primary task, were shorter under the voluntary- than cued-naming condition. Task workload ratings were also higher under the cued- than voluntary-naming condition. This suggests more attentional resources are needed in a cued-naming context to monitor cues and select languages accordingly. However, the costs associated with switching from one language to the other were similar in both voluntary- and cued-naming contexts. Thus, while cued-naming might be more effortful overall, cued and voluntary <i>switching</i> recruited similar levels of cognitive resources.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"461-477\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10880414/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231173638\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/5/18 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231173638","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/5/18 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

双语者切换语言的方式会因环境而异。在有提示的双语环境中,双语者根据环境提示(例如,单语对话伙伴)选择一种语言。在自愿双语环境中,双语者与讲相同语言的人交流时,可以更自由地使用自己的语言。有人认为,这些类型的语言生产环境对控制的要求以及语言转换的成本是不同的(适应性控制假说)。在此,我们使用双任务范式来研究提示性和自愿性双语生产在认知资源使用上有何不同。40名普通话和英语双语者完成了两个语言转换范式作为主要任务:一个是对提示做出反应,另一个是自由使用两种语言。同时,他们还必须对音调的高低做出反应(次要任务)。在自愿条件下,次要任务的反应时间(RTs)和主要任务的命名时间都比在提示条件下短。在提示命名条件下,任务工作量评分也高于自愿命名条件。这表明,在提示命名条件下,需要更多的注意力资源来监控提示并相应地选择语言。然而,在自愿和提示命名的情境中,从一种语言转换到另一种语言的相关成本是相似的。因此,虽然提示命名总体上可能更费力,但提示转换和自愿转换所需的认知资源水平相似。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Dual-tasking while using two languages: Examining the cognitive resource demands of cued and voluntary language production in bilinguals.

The way bilinguals switch languages can differ depending on the context. In cued dual-language environments, bilinguals select a language in response to environmental cues (e.g., a monolingual conversation partner). In voluntary dual-language environments, bilinguals communicating with people who speak the same languages can use their languages more freely. The control demands of these types of language-production contexts, and the costs of language switches, have been argued to differ (Adaptive Control Hypothesis). Here, we used a dual-task paradigm to examine how cued and voluntary bilingual production differ in cognitive resources used. Forty Mandarin-English bilinguals completed two language-switching paradigms as the primary task; one in response to cues and one while using two languages freely. At the same time, they also had to respond to the pitch of tones (secondary task). Response times (RTs) on the secondary task, as well as naming times on the primary task, were shorter under the voluntary- than cued-naming condition. Task workload ratings were also higher under the cued- than voluntary-naming condition. This suggests more attentional resources are needed in a cued-naming context to monitor cues and select languages accordingly. However, the costs associated with switching from one language to the other were similar in both voluntary- and cued-naming contexts. Thus, while cued-naming might be more effortful overall, cued and voluntary switching recruited similar levels of cognitive resources.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
3.50
自引率
5.90%
发文量
178
审稿时长
3-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling. QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form. The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.
期刊最新文献
Reasoning in social versus non-social domains and its relation to autistic traits. When is a causal illusion an illusion? Separating discriminability and bias in human contingency judgements. Advancing an account of hierarchical dual-task control: A focused review on abstract higher-level task representations in dual-task situations. The effect of chronic academic stress on attentional bias towards value-associated stimuli. Is the precedence of social re-orienting only inherent to the initiators?
×
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