On the specificity of bilingual language control: A study with Parkinson's disease patients

2019 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 570-578 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gabriele Cattaneo ◽  
Albert Costa ◽  
Alexandre Gironell ◽  
Marco Calabria
Keyword(s):  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Mixing Costs ◽  
Linguistic Control ◽  
Dual Mechanism ◽  
The Relationship

AbstractThis study investigates the relationship between mechanisms involved in language control within dual- and single-language contexts by examining whether they are similarly impaired in bilingual PD patients. To do so, we explored the performance of bilingual individuals affected by PD and healthy controls on two linguistic tasks: between-language and within-language switching tasks. We focused on switch and mixing costs as measures of linguistic control.The results indicate that, whereas larger switch costs were observed in PD patients, compared to controls, solely during the between-language task, larger mixing costs appeared during both the between-language task and the within-language task. These results are discussed within the framework of the dual mechanism hypothesis, which suggests that switch and mixing costs are measures of two types of control: specifically reactive and proactive control. Therefore, we conclude that reactive control for switching between languages is domain-specific while proactive control mechanisms are more domain-general.

scholarly journals Proactive and Reactive Language Control in the Bilingual Brain

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (7) ◽  
pp. 161 ◽  
Author(s):  
Roy Seo ◽  
Chantel S. Prat
Keyword(s):  
Inferior Frontal Gyrus ◽  
Anterior Cingulate ◽  
Target Language ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Bilingual Speakers ◽  
Dorsolateral Prefrontal ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Global Language

The current experiment investigated bilingual language control within the dual mechanisms framework. In an fMRI investigation of morphosyntactic rule production, the presence or absence of target language cues was manipulated to investigate the neural mechanisms associated with proactive and reactive global language control mechanisms. Patterns of activation across nine regions of interest (ROIs) were investigated in seventeen early Spanish–English bilingual speakers. A cue by phase interaction in the left dorsolateral prefrontal cortex (DLPFC) and pre-supplementary motor area (Pre-SMA) was observed, suggesting that these regions were more active during cue phases, and less active during execution phases, when target language cues were presented. Individual differences analyses showed that variability in proactive control (informative > non-informative cued trial activation during preparation) in the basal ganglia was correlated with proactive control in the left DLPFC, left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG), and right precentral ROIs. In contrast, reactive control (non-informative > informative cued activation during execution) in the anterior cingulate was correlated with reactive control in the Pre-SMA and left orbital frontal ROIs. The results suggest that, consistent with the dual mechanisms framework, bilinguals differ in the degree to which they use cues to proactively prepare to use a target language.

Language-switch costs and dual-response costs in bimodal bilingual language production

2015 ◽  
Vol 20 (2) ◽  
pp. 418-434 ◽  
Author(s):  
EMILY KAUFMANN ◽  
ANDREA M. PHILIPP
Keyword(s):  
Sign Language ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Language Switching ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Signed Language ◽  
Dual Response ◽  
Single Response ◽  
Mixing Costs ◽  
German Sign Language

In communication, different forms of language combinations are possible for bimodal bilinguals, who use a spoken and a signed language. They can either switch from one language to another (language switching) or produce a word and a sign simultaneously (language blending). The present study examines language control mechanisms in language switching and simultaneous bimodal language production, comparing single-response (German or German Sign Language) and dual-response trials (Blend of the German word and the German Sign Language sign). There were three pure blocks, one for each Target-response (German, German Sign Language, Blend), as well as mixed blocks, in which participants switched between all three Target-responses. We observed language mixing costs, switch costs and dual-response costs. Further, the data pattern showed a specific dual-response advantage for switching into a Blend (i.e., a dual-response trial), indicating the specific nature of a blended response in bimodal bilingual language production.

scholarly journals Voluntary Language Switching in the Context of Bilingual Aphasia

2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (9) ◽  
pp. 141
Author(s):  
Nicholas Grunden ◽  
Giorgio Piazza ◽  
Carmen García-Sánchez ◽  
Marco Calabria
Keyword(s):  
Group Performance ◽  
Ecological Validity ◽  
Control Group ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Language Switching ◽  
Individual Level ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Bilingual Aphasia ◽  
The Individual

As studies of bilingual language control (BLC) seek to explore the underpinnings of bilinguals’ abilities to juggle two languages, different types of language switching tasks have been used to uncover switching and mixing effects and thereby reveal what proactive and reactive control mechanisms are involved in language switching. Voluntary language switching tasks, where a bilingual participant can switch freely between their languages while naming, are being utilized more often due to their greater ecological validity compared to cued switching paradigms. Because this type of task had not yet been applied to language switching in bilingual patients, our study sought to explore voluntary switching in bilinguals with aphasia (BWAs) as well as in healthy bilinguals. In Experiment 1, we replicated previously reported results of switch costs and mixing benefits within our own bilingual population of Catalan-Spanish bilinguals. With Experiment 2, we compared both the performances of BWAs as a group and as individuals against control group performance. Results illustrated a complex picture of language control abilities, indicating varying degrees of association and dissociation between factors of BLC. Given the diversity of impairments in BWAs’ language control mechanisms, we highlight the need to examine BLC at the individual level and through the lens of theoretical cognitive control frameworks in order to further parse out how bilinguals regulate their language switching.

scholarly journals Proactive Control of Emotional Distraction: An ERP Investigation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Laura Kranz
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Emotional Processing ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Frequency Condition ◽  
Distractor Processing ◽  
Early Posterior Negativity ◽  
Distraction Task ◽  
Emotional Distraction

<p>According to the Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) framework (Braver, 2012) distraction can be controlled either proactively (i.e., before the onset of a distractor) or reactively (i.e., after the onset of a distractor). Research clearly indicates that, when distractors are emotionally neutral, proactive mechanisms are more effective at controlling distraction than reactive mechanisms. However, whether proactive control mechanisms can control irrelevant emotional distractions as effectively as neutral distraction is not known. In the current thesis I examined cognitive control over emotional distraction. In Experiment 1, I tested whether proactive mechanisms can control emotional distraction as effectively as neutral distraction. Participants completed a distraction task. On each trial, they determined whether a centrally presented target letter (embedded amongst a circle of ‘o’s) was an ‘X’ or an ‘N’, while ignoring peripheral distractors (negative, neutral, or positive images). Distractors were presented on either a low proportion (25%) or a high proportion (75%) of trials, to evoke reactive and proactive cognitive control strategies, respectively. Emotional images (both positive and negative) produced more distraction than neutral images in the low distractor frequency (i.e., reactive control) condition. Critically, emotional distraction was almost abolished in the high distractor frequency condition; emotional images were only slightly more distracting than neutral images, suggesting that proactive mechanisms can control emotional distraction almost as effectively as neutral distraction. In Experiment 2, I replicated and extended Experiment 1. ERPs were recorded while participants completed the distraction task. An early index (the early posterior negativity; EPN) and a late index (the late positive potential; LPP) of emotional processing were examined to investigate the mechanisms by which proactive control minimises emotional distraction. The behavioural results of Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, providing further support for the hypothesis that proactive mechanisms can control emotional distractions as effectively as neutral distractions. While proactive control was found to eliminate early emotional processing of positive distractors, it paradoxically did not attenuate late emotional processing of positive distractors. On the other hand, proactive control eliminated late emotional processing of negative distractors. However, the early index of emotional processing was not a reliable index of negative distractor processing under either reactive or proactive conditions. Taken together, my findings show that proactive mechanisms can effectively control emotional distraction, but do not clearly establish the mechanisms by which this occurs.</p>

scholarly journals Inattention and task switching performance: the role of predictability, working memory load and goal neglect

2019 ◽  
Vol 84 (8) ◽  
pp. 2090-2110
Author(s):  
Gizem Arabacı ◽  
Benjamin A. Parris
Keyword(s):  
Working Memory ◽  
Task Switching ◽  
Memory Load ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Working Memory Load ◽  
Switching Performance ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Goal Neglect

Abstract Inattention is a symptom of many clinical disorders including attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and is thought to be primarily related to limitations in working memory. In two studies, we investigated the implications of inattention for task switching performance. In study one, we measured task switching performance using predictable and unpredictable conditions in adults who self-rated inattention and other ADHD-related tendencies. Tasks required proactive control and reactive control, respectively, under both high and low working memory loads. Results revealed that inattentive, but not hyperactive/impulsive traits, predicted switch costs when switching was predictable and working memory load was high. None of the ADHD traits were related to unpredictable switch costs. Study two was designed to: (1) de-confound the role of proactive control and the need to keep track of task order in the predictable task switching paradigm; (2) investigate whether goal neglect, an impairment related to working memory, could explain the relationship between inattention and predictable task switching. Results revealed that neither predictability nor the need to keep track of the task order led to the association between switch costs and inattention, but instead it was the tendency for those high in inattention to neglect preparatory proactive control, especially when reactive control options were available.

scholarly journals Bilingual Language Control and General Purpose Cognitive Control among Individuals with Bilingual Aphasia: Evidence Based on Negative Priming and Flanker Tasks

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-20 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tanya Dash ◽  
Bhoomika R. Kar
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Negative Priming ◽  
Flanker Task ◽  
General Purpose ◽  
Interactive Systems ◽  
Cumulative Distribution ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Bilingual Aphasia

Background. Bilingualism results in an added advantage with respect to cognitive control. The interaction between bilingual language control and general purpose cognitive control systems can also be understood by studying executive control among individuals with bilingual aphasia.Objectives. The current study examined the subcomponents of cognitive control in bilingual aphasia. A case study approach was used to investigate whether cognitive control and language control are two separate systems and how factors related to bilingualism interact with control processes.Methods. Four individuals with bilingual aphasia performed a language background questionnaire, picture description task, and two experimental tasks (nonlinguistic negative priming task and linguistic and nonlinguistic versions of flanker task).Results. A descriptive approach was used to analyse the data using reaction time and accuracy measures. The cumulative distribution function plots were used to visualize the variations in performance across conditions. The results highlight the distinction between general purpose cognitive control and bilingual language control mechanisms.Conclusion. All participants showed predominant use of the reactive control mechanism to compensate for the limited resources system. Independent yet interactive systems for bilingual language control and general purpose cognitive control were postulated based on the experimental data derived from individuals with bilingual aphasia.

The broken balance in the use of proactive and reactive control in high risk-takers

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fanny Grisetto ◽  
Pierre Le Denmat ◽  
Yvonne N. Delevoye-Turrell ◽  
Quentin Vantrepotte ◽  
Tanguy Davin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Reaction Time ◽  
Risk Taking ◽  
Risky Behaviors ◽  
Stop Signal ◽  
Button Press ◽  
Maladaptive Behaviors ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Reactive Inhibition ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control

According to the dual mechanisms of control (DMC), both reactive and proactive control are involved in adjusting behaviors when those are not appropriate to the environment. These control mechanisms have different costs and benefits, orienting the implementation of one or the other control mechanisms as a function of contextual and inter-individual factors. However, to our knowledge, no studies have investigated whether reactive control capacities modulate the use of proactive control. According to the DMC, poor reactive control capacities should be counterbalanced by greater proactive control involvement to efficiently adjust behaviors. We expected that maladaptive behaviors, such as risk-taking, would be characterized by an absence of such compensation. A total of 176 healthy adults performed two reaction time tasks (the Simon and the Stop Signal tasks) and a risk-taking assessment (the Balloon Analog Risk Taking, BART). For each individual, the Stop Signal Reaction Time (SSRT) was used to assess reactive inhibition capacities and the mean duration of the button press in the BART was used as an index of risk-taking propensity. The post-error slowing (PES) in the Simon task reflected the individuals’ tendency to proactively adjust behaviors after an error. Our results showed that smaller SSRT, revealing better reactive inhibition capacities, were associated with shorter PES, suggesting less involvement of proactive adjustments. Moreover, higher the risk-taking propensity, lesser was the proactive control counterbalance for poor reactive inhibition capacities. Risky behaviors, and more broadly maladaptive behaviors, could emerge from the absence of proactive control counterbalance for reactive control deficits

scholarly journals Proactive Control of Emotional Distraction: An ERP Investigation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
Laura Kranz
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Emotional Processing ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
Proactive Control ◽  
Reactive Control ◽  
Frequency Condition ◽  
Distractor Processing ◽  
Early Posterior Negativity ◽  
Distraction Task ◽  
Emotional Distraction

<p>According to the Dual Mechanisms of Control (DMC) framework (Braver, 2012) distraction can be controlled either proactively (i.e., before the onset of a distractor) or reactively (i.e., after the onset of a distractor). Research clearly indicates that, when distractors are emotionally neutral, proactive mechanisms are more effective at controlling distraction than reactive mechanisms. However, whether proactive control mechanisms can control irrelevant emotional distractions as effectively as neutral distraction is not known. In the current thesis I examined cognitive control over emotional distraction. In Experiment 1, I tested whether proactive mechanisms can control emotional distraction as effectively as neutral distraction. Participants completed a distraction task. On each trial, they determined whether a centrally presented target letter (embedded amongst a circle of ‘o’s) was an ‘X’ or an ‘N’, while ignoring peripheral distractors (negative, neutral, or positive images). Distractors were presented on either a low proportion (25%) or a high proportion (75%) of trials, to evoke reactive and proactive cognitive control strategies, respectively. Emotional images (both positive and negative) produced more distraction than neutral images in the low distractor frequency (i.e., reactive control) condition. Critically, emotional distraction was almost abolished in the high distractor frequency condition; emotional images were only slightly more distracting than neutral images, suggesting that proactive mechanisms can control emotional distraction almost as effectively as neutral distraction. In Experiment 2, I replicated and extended Experiment 1. ERPs were recorded while participants completed the distraction task. An early index (the early posterior negativity; EPN) and a late index (the late positive potential; LPP) of emotional processing were examined to investigate the mechanisms by which proactive control minimises emotional distraction. The behavioural results of Experiment 2 replicated Experiment 1, providing further support for the hypothesis that proactive mechanisms can control emotional distractions as effectively as neutral distractions. While proactive control was found to eliminate early emotional processing of positive distractors, it paradoxically did not attenuate late emotional processing of positive distractors. On the other hand, proactive control eliminated late emotional processing of negative distractors. However, the early index of emotional processing was not a reliable index of negative distractor processing under either reactive or proactive conditions. Taken together, my findings show that proactive mechanisms can effectively control emotional distraction, but do not clearly establish the mechanisms by which this occurs.</p>

The effect of task complexity on linguistic and non-linguistic control mechanisms in bilingual aphasia

2018 ◽  
Vol 22 (2) ◽  
pp. 266-284 ◽  
Author(s):  
TERESA GRAY ◽  
SWATHI KIRAN
Keyword(s):  
Cognitive Control ◽  
Language Impairment ◽  
Task Complexity ◽  
Control Mechanisms ◽  
High Complexity ◽  
Domain Specific ◽  
English Bilingual ◽  
Bilingual Aphasia ◽  
Linguistic Control ◽  
Significant Conflict

In this study we examined linguistic and non-linguistic control mechanisms in 20 Spanish–English neurologically healthy bilingual adults and 13 Spanish–English bilingual adults with aphasia. Participants completed two linguistic and two non-linguistic control tasks accounting for low and high complexity. Healthy bilingual results were indicative of domain general cognitive control, whereas patient results were indicative of domain specific cognitive control. The magnitude of conflict required to complete the tasks was also examined. Healthy bilinguals exhibited significant amounts of conflict on all tasks and linguistic and non-linguistic conflict ratios were correlated; whereas patient results revealed significant conflict only on non-linguistic tasks and those conflict ratios were not correlated with linguistic conflict ratios, indicating a dissociation between how patients are controlling information in these two domains. Finally, a relationship between language impairment and language control was identified and brain damage was associated with linguistic and non-linguistic task performance.

Bilingual language control across modalities

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (4-5) ◽  
pp. 542-568 ◽  
Author(s):  
Esli Struys ◽  
Jill Surmont ◽  
Piet Van de Craen ◽  
Olga Kepinska ◽  
Maurits Van den Noort
Keyword(s):  
Young Adults ◽  
Language Comprehension ◽  
Verbal Fluency ◽  
Language Production ◽  
Switch Costs ◽  
Global Performance ◽  
Mixed Language ◽  
Language Control ◽  
Global Accuracy ◽  
Mixing Costs

Abstract Bilingual language control has previously been tested separately in tasks of language comprehension and language production. Whereas these studies have suggested that local control processes are selectively recruited during mixed-language production, the present study investigated whether measures of global control show the same dependence on modality, or are shared across modalities. Thirty-eight Dutch-French bilingual young adults participated by completing two tasks of bilingual language control in both modalities. Global accuracy on mixed-language comprehension was related to mixing costs on bilingual verbal fluency, but only when compared to the L2-baseline. Global performance on mixed-language production was related to forward (L1-to-L2) switch costs. Finally, a significant correlation was found between the mixing cost on verbal fluency and forward switch costs on the comprehension task. The results are interpreted as evidence for the involvement of monitoring processes in bilingual language control across modality. The results also highlight the relevance of language switch directionality.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document