语言切换情境对认知控制子成分的适应性作用—来自维−汉−英三语者的证据

doi:10.12139/j.1672-0628.2024.05.001

摘要/Abstract

摘要：

本研究以维−汉−英三语者为被试，在双高/高−低优势度语言切换情境或单语情境启动任务后通过面孔任务考察语言切换情境对不同认知控制子成分的适应性影响。结果显示：(1)双高优势度语言切换情境未显著改变被试的认知控制水平；(2)高−低优势度语言切换情境提升了面孔任务的反应抑制水平，而降低了干扰控制表现。这些结果表明短暂的语言切换经验可以适应性改变个体的反应抑制和干扰控制能力，并且该适应性变化受语言优势度的调节。

关键词: 语言切换情境, 认知控制, 语言优势度, 三语者

Abstract:

We investigated the adaptive effects of language switching on different cognitive control components among Uyghur-Chinese-English trilinguals. Participants performed a face task following a number naming task in either a double-high/high-low dominance language switching or a monolingual situation. The results revealed that: 1) the double-high dominance language-switching context did not significantly alter participants’ cognitive control levels; 2) the high-low dominance language-switching context improved response inhibition in the face task, reducing interference control performance. These findings suggest that brief language-switching experiences can adaptively modify individuals’ response inhibition and interference control, with the adaptive changes being moderated by the degree of language dominance.

Key words: language switching context, cognitive control, language dominance, trilinguals

伊里努尔•热甫卡迪江, 郭晶晶. 语言切换情境对认知控制子成分的适应性作用—来自维−汉−英三语者的证据[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2024, 22(5): 577-584.

Yilinuer REFUKADIJIANG, Jingjing GUO. The Adaptive Effects of Language Switching Contexts on Different Cognitive Control Components: Evidence from Uyghur-Chinese-English Trilinguals[J]. Studies of Psychology and Behavior, 2024, 22(5): 577-584.

图/表 8

图1 实验1维−汉−英三语被试语言熟练程度和语言优势程度注：*p<0.05，**p<0.01，***p<0.001，以下同。

图2 单语数字命名任务(左)和双语切换数字命名任务(右)流程图

图3 面孔任务流程图

表1 汉语单语及维−汉双语切换情境下认知控制子成分的正确率和反应时差值(M±SD)

语言情境	反应抑制		干扰控制		认知灵活性
语言情境	正确率	反应时(ms)	正确率	反应时(ms)	正确率	反应时(ms)
汉语单语	0.08±0.24	17±27	0.08±0.29	18±48	−0.35±0.36	47±44
维−汉双语切换	−0.27±1.08	20±37	0.07±0.33	5±49	−0.34±0.29	47±53

图4 实验2维−汉−英三语被试语言熟练程度和语言优势程度

表2 英语单语及维−英双语切换情境下认知控制子成分的正确率和反应时差值(M±SD)

语言情境	反应抑制		干扰控制		认知灵活性
语言情境	正确率	反应时(ms)	正确率	反应时(ms)	正确率	反应时(ms)
英语单语	−0.03±0.27	31±31	0.10±0.24	3±65	−0.26±0.33	37±54
维−英双语切换	0.01±0.31	9±48	0.14±0.26	39±53	−0.40±0.31	46±46

图5 英语单语及维−英双语切换情境下认知控制子成分反应时差值

图6 反应抑制、干扰控制在不同优势语言有无切换情境下的反应时差值注：图中高优势度语言单语是汉语单语情境，高优势度语言双语切换是维−汉双语切换情境；低优势度语言单语是英语单语情境，低优势度语言双语切换是维−英双语切换情境。

参考文献 0

	常松, 王瑞明, 李利, 谢久书. 非熟练双语者言语产生中非目标语言的激活范围. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29 (1): 54- 60.
	范小月, 王瑞明, 吴际, 林哲婷. 熟练和非熟练中英双语者不同认知控制成分的比较. 心理科学, 2012, 35 (6): 1304- 1308.
	李美华, 白学军. 执行功能中认知灵活性发展的研究进展. 心理学探新, 2005, 25 (2): 35- 38, 43. DOI
	李莹, 赵鸿瑜, 张木军, 范子璇, 王悦. 执行控制的双语优势效应及其调节变量: 来自元分析的证据. 心理科学进展, 2023, 31 (6): 970- 987.
	刘聪, 焦鲁, 孙逊, 王瑞明. 语言转换对非熟练双语者不同认知控制成分的即时影响. 心理学报, 2016, 48 (5): 472- 481.
	叶嘉文, 王瑞明, 李利, 范梦. 语言产生过程中非目标语言的激活与抑制. 心理学报, 2011, 43 (11): 1263- 1272.
	周晓林, 玛依拉·亚克甫, 李恋敬, 吕建国. 语言经验可以改变双语者的主导语言. 心理科学, 2008, 31 (2): 266- 272. DOI
	Abutalebi, J., Della Rosa, P. A., Ding, G. S., Weekes, B., Costa, A., & Green, D. W. Language proficiency modulates the engagement of cognitive control areas in multilinguals. Cortex, 2013, 49 (3): 905- 911. DOI
	Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Ryan, J. (2006). Executive control in a modified antisaccade task: Effects of aging and bilingualism. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 32(6), 1341–1354.
	Bialystok, E., & Viswanathan, M. Components of executive control with advantages for bilingual children in two cultures. Cognition, 2009, 112 (3): 494- 500. DOI
	Blanco-Elorrieta, E., & Pylkkänen, L. Ecological validity in bilingualism research and the bilingual advantage. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 2018, 22 (12): 1117- 1126. DOI
	Bobb, S. C., & Wodniecka, Z. Language switching in picture naming: What asymmetric switch costs (do not) tell us about inhibition in bilingual speech planning. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2013, 25 (5): 568- 585. DOI
	Brydges, C. R., Anderson, M., Reid, C. L., & Fox, A. M. Maturation of cognitive control: Delineating response inhibition and interference suppression. PLoS One, 2013, 8 (7): e69826. DOI
	Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
	Dick, A. S., Garcia, N. L., Pruden, S. M., Thompson, W. K., Hawes, S. W., Sutherland, M. T., ... Gonzalez, R. No evidence for a bilingual executive function advantage in the ABCD study. Nature Human Behaviour, 2019, 3 (7): 692- 701. DOI
	Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 2007, 39 (2): 175- 191. DOI
	Goldrick, M., & Gollan, T. H. Inhibitory control of the dominant language: Reversed language dominance is the tip of the iceberg. Journal of Memory and Language, 2023, 130, 104410. DOI
	Gosselin, L., & Sabourin, L. Language athletes: Dual-language code-switchers exhibit inhibitory control advantages. Frontiers in Psychology, 2023, 14, 1150159. DOI
	Green, D. W. Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1998, 1 (2): 67- 81. DOI
	Green, D. W., & Abutalebi, J. Language control in bilinguals: The adaptive control hypothesis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 2013, 25 (5): 515- 530. DOI
	Jiao, L., Liu, C., Wang, R. M., & Chen, B. G. Working memory demand of a task modulates bilingual advantage in executive functions. International Journal of Bilingualism, 2019, 23 (1): 102- 117. DOI
	Li, P., Zhang, F., Yu, A. Y., & Zhao, X. W. Language History Questionnaire (LHQ3): An enhanced tool for assessing multilingual experience. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2020, 23 (5): 938- 944. DOI
	Markiewicz, R., Mazaheri, A., & Krott, A. Bilingualism can cause enhanced monitoring and occasional delayed responses in a flanker task. The European Journal of Neuroscience, 2023, 57 (1): 129- 147. DOI
	Meuter, R. F. I., & Allport, A. Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 1999, 40 (1): 25- 40. DOI
	Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A., & Wager, T. D. The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “Frontal Lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 2000, 41 (1): 49- 100. DOI
	Mosca, M. Trilinguals’ language switching: A strategic and flexible account. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2019, 72 (4): 693- 716. DOI
	Shook, A., & Marian, V. Covert co-activation of bilinguals’ non-target language: Phonological competition from translations. Linguistic Approaches to Bilingualism, 2019, 9 (2): 228- 252. DOI
	Tse, C. S., & Alt Arriba, J. Local and global task switching costs in bilinguals who vary in second language proficiency. The American Journal of Psychology, 2015, 128 (1): 89- 106. DOI
	Wiseheart, M., Viswanathan, M., & Bialystok, E. Flexibility in task switching by monolinguals and bilinguals. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 2016, 19 (1): 141- 146. DOI
	Wu, J. J., Yang, J., Chen, M., Li, S. H., Zhang, Z. Q., Kang, C. Y., ... Guo, T. M. Brain network reconfiguration for language and domain-general cognitive control in bilinguals. NeuroImage, 2019, 199, 454- 465. DOI
	Yow, W. Q., & Li, X. Q. Balanced bilingualism and early age of second language acquisition as the underlying mechanisms of a bilingual executive control advantage: Why variations in bilingual experiences matter. Frontiers in Psychology, 2015, 6, 164.
	Zhang, H. Y., Diaz, M. T., Guo, T. M., & Kroll, J. F. Language immersion and language training: Two paths to enhanced language regulation and cognitive control. Brain and Language, 2021, 223, 105043. DOI

[1]	夏天生, 谭玲. 刺激–反应联结学习在项目特异性比例一致效应中的作用[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2021, 19(3): 326-333.
[2]	朱海,白学军. 不同反应重复量对反应抑制后效应的影响^*[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2016, 14(2): 186-190.
[3]	朱昭红, 马骁, 张俊峰. 心理疲劳对认知控制和动机影响的外周生理机制[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(6): 752-758.
[4]	白学军, 朱海. 不同刺激重复量对反应抑制后效应的影响[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2013, 11(3): 301-304.
[5]	张锦坤,白学军,连榕. 记忆监控的准确性与有效记忆[J]. 心理与行为研究, 2009, 7(4): 284-288.
[6]	焦江丽,；王勇慧；边国栋4. 认知控制对基于位置和颜色返回抑制的影响[J]. , 2009, 7(1): 44-49.