Presentation by Hanh Dinh and Beverly Beaudette What causes the bilingual disadvantage in verbal fluency? The dual-task analogy By Tiffany C. Sandoval, Tamar H. Gollan, Victor S. Ferriera, and David P. Salmon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OXqTFknh3oM -Beverly intro Presentation by Hanh Dinh and Beverly Beaudette

The Bilingual Disadvantage Literature Review The Bilingual Disadvantage 1. Bilinguals vs. Monolinguals Name fewer pictures (Robert et al., 2002) Name pictures more slowly (Gollan et al., 2005) More tip-of-the-tongue retrieval failures (Gollan & Silberberg, 2001) 2. Among bilinguals (dominant vs. non-dominant language) Reduced verbal fluency in even dominant and first-learned language (Gollan et al., 2005; Ransdell, 1987) Beverly; edited, done

Supporting the dual-task analogy Opposing the dual-task analogy Theory 1: Retrieval slowing with interference between languages: the dual-task analogy Simultaneously retrieve target language exemplars while controlling interference from non-target language Supporting the dual-task analogy Opposing the dual-task analogy Language mixing has a strong effect on dominant language production (Meuter and Allport, 1999) Dominance reversal (Christoffels et al., 2007) Dominance reversal implies inhibitory control of dominant language during language mixing (Kroll et al., 2008; Gollan & Ferriera, 2009) Dominant language is immune to the competition (Gollan et al., 2005) Especially related to balanced bilinguals (Costa and Santesteban, 2004) Plays a limited (or no) role in picture naming in the dominant language (Finkbeiner et al., 2006; Gollan et al., 2008) -Beverly Edited, done

Theory 2: Retrieval slowing without interference - the weaker links account What are the weaker links? (use each language relatively less than monolinguals) Supporting studies: bilinguals have more disadvantages with low-frequency picture names (Gollan et al, 2008) + more slowly + affect strongly on non- dominant language => less likely to retrieve low-frequency than monolinguals versus among high-frequency interference => call for more verbal fluency tasks in research design Hanh

Theory 3: The reduced vocabulary hypothesis: the category size analogy What is the category size analogy? Supporting studies: bilinguals score slower than monolinguals on vocab test (Craik & Luk, 2008); take more time to retrieve words (Gollan and Silverberg, 2001) => again, the advantage of language production test (verbal fluency tasks) => predict that the disadvantage of bilinguals will happen at the end of the test https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rX756_kyyy0 -Hanh

Measuring the time-course of retrieval The average time to produce each response for single and dual tasks (Rohrer, 1995) for monolinguals “Fulcrum point”: the balance (spread) of responses in terms of when they occur across the fluency trial Retrieval time using PsyScope response box -Hanh

Idealized “fulcrum point” for hypothesis 1 and 2 -Hanh

Experiment 1: Methodology: Instruments 30 English-speaking monolinguals and 24 English-Spanish bilinguals 15 semantic categories (with smaller subsets) and 24 double-letter categories were alternatively used in the testing Participants were asked to: name as many examples of things they could think of in one minute not use the same word with a different ending Beverly edited, done

Results and Discussion Supported the dual-task analogy of the bilingual fluency disadvantage: fewer correct response slower first response times right - shifted fulcrum points Hypothesis 3 (Reduced Vocabulary) refuted: Right-shifted fulcrum points demonstrated bilinguals’ vocabulary was not exhausted more quickly Hypothesis 2 (Weaker Links) refuted: Bilinguals produced more low-frequency words than monolinguals Beverly edited, done

I will discuss this slide if we need more material! Edited done

Experiment 2: Methodology: Instruments A debate on: “interference is greater in non-dominant language production than it is for the dominant language” (Kroll, 2008) or the dominant language is immune to the interference and no need to inhibit the non-dominant? The activation facilitate more than interfere? 45 Spanish-English bilinguals (English dominant) 12 semantic categories = “...the dominant language is immune to interference from the non-dominant language”

Results and Discussion:

Results & Discussion Non-dominant language – Spanish: fewer correct responses, slower responses, longer fulcrum points; emerging early of the trial => There is between-language interference; it is greater during the production of non-dominant language (supported the dual-task analogy ) => Language dominance effects are quite consistent across different categories Relatively similar error rates

Conclusion & Contributions Bilinguals are not able to “shut off” activation of non-target language and function like monolingual speakers Bilinguals will always be most fluent when tested under conditions that minimize dual-language activation The option to use either language frees bilinguals from production in only one language, but also burdens them with choosing Language switching may even lead bilinguals to have even lower verbal fluency scores Delete slide when done getting info

Discussion Questions What do you think about this study? Is it persuasive? Do you think there are some limitations or challenges? Can you give some practical examples (maybe from your language teaching) regarding to these disadvantages of bilinguals in verbal fluency? Do you think the teachers can help students who have those disadvantages? How? Delete slide when done getting info