Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-cjp7w Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-20T02:27:36.291Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Digits vs. pictures: The influence of stimulus type on language switching*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2012

MATHIEU DECLERCK ,
IRING KOCH  and
ANDREA M. PHILIPP
MATHIEU DECLERCK*
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University
IRING KOCH
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University
ANDREA M. PHILIPP
Affiliation:
Institute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University
*
Address for correspondence: Mathieu Declerck, Institute of Psychology, RWTH Aachen University, Jägerstrasse 17–19, 52066 Aachen, GermanyMathieu.Declerck@psych.rwth-aachen.de
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Stimuli used in cued language switching studies typically consist of digits or pictures. However, the comparability between both stimulus types remains unclear. In the present study, we directly compared digit and picture naming in a German–English language switching experiment. Because digits represent a semantic group and contain many cognates, the experiment consisted of four conditions with different stimulus sets in each condition: digits, standard language switching pictures, pictures depicting cognates, and semantically-related pictures. Digit naming caused smaller switch costs than picture naming. The data suggest that this difference can be attributed to phonology. Both methodological and theoretical implications are discussed.

Keywords

bilingualismlanguage controllanguage switchingdigit namingpicture naming
Type
Research Notes
Information
Bilingualism: Language and Cognition , Volume 15 , Issue 4 , October 2012 , pp. 896 - 904
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The authors would like to thank David W. Green, Susan C. Bobb and one anonymous reviewer for helpful comments on an earlier version of this article.

References

Allport, A., & Wylie, G. (2000). “Task switching”, stimulus–response bindings, and negative priming. In Monsell, S. & Driver, J. (eds.), Control of cognitive processes: Attentionand performance XVIII, pp. 35–70. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Arrington, C. M., Weaver, S. M., & Pauker, R. L. (2010). Stimulus-based priming of task choice during voluntary task switching. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 36, 1060–1067.Google ScholarPubMed
Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX Lexical Database (CD-ROM). Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
Brysbaert, M. (1995). Arabic number reading: On the nature of the numerical scale and the origin of phonological recoding. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 124, 434–452.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, J. I. D. (2005). Asymmetrical language switching costs in Chinese–English bilinguals’ number naming and simple arithmetic. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8, 85–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cappelletti, M., Warrington, E. K., & Butterworth, B. (1995). Selective impairment in manipulating Arabic numerals. Cortex, 31, 73–86.Google Scholar
Christoffels, I. K., Firk, C., & Schiller, N. O. (2007). Bilingual language control: An event-related brain potential study. Brain Research, 1147, 192–208.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Costa, A., Caramazza, A., & Sebastian-Galles, N. (2000). The cognate facilitation effect: Implications for models of lexical access. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26, 1283–1296.Google ScholarPubMed
Costa, A., & Santesteban, M. (2004). Lexical access in bilingual speech production: Evidencefrom language switching in highly proficient bilinguals and L2 learners. Journal of Memory and Language, 50, 491–511.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Costa, A., Santesteban, M., & Ivanova, I. (2006). How do highly proficient bilinguals control their lexicalization process? Inhibitory and language-specific selection mechanisms are both functional. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 32, 1057–1074.Google ScholarPubMed
Ehri, L. C., & Rayn, E. B. (1980). Performance of bilinguals in a picture–word interference task. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 9, 285–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Glaser, W. R., & Düngelhoff, F. J. (1984). The time course of picture word interference. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 10, 640–654.Google ScholarPubMed
Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 213–229.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hernandez, A. E., & Kohnert, K. J. (1999). Aging and language switching in bilinguals. Aging Neuropsychology and Cognition, 6, 69–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrera, A., & Macizo, P. (2010). The production of symbolic and non-symbolic numerals. Procedia Social and Behavioral Sciences, 5, 926–934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Herrera, A., & Macizo, P. (2011). Naming digits in a semantic blocking paradigm. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 328–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Horoufchin, H., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2011). The dissipating task-repetition benefit in task switching: Task-set decay or temporal distinctiveness? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37, 455–472.Google ScholarPubMed
Hoshino, N., & Kroll, J. F. (2008). Cognate effects in picture naming: Does cross-language activation survive a change of script? Cognition, 106, 501–511.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Indefrey, P., & Levelt, W. J. M. (2004). The spatial and temporal signatures of wordproduction components. Cognition, 92, 101–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiesel, A., Wendt, M., Jost, K., Steinhauser, M., Falkenstein, M., Philipp, A. M., & Koch, I. (2010). Control and interference in task switching: A review. Psychological Bulletin, 136, 849–874.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koch, I., & Allport, A. (2006). Cue-based preparation and stimulus-based priming of tasks in task switching. Memory and Cognition, 34, 433–444.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koch, I., Gade, M., Schuch, S., & Philipp, A. M. (2010). The role of inhibition in task switching: A review. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17, 1–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Koch, I., & Philipp, A. M. (2005). Effects of response selection on the task repetition benefitin task switching. Memory & Cognition, 33, 624–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioural and Brain sciences, 22, 1–38.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Loebell, H., & Bock, K. (2003). Structural priming across languages. Linguistics, 41, 791–824.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCloskey, M. (1992). Cognitive mechanisms in numerical processing: Evidence from acquired dyscalculia. Cognition, 44, 107–157.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meuter, R. F. I., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philipp, A. M., Gade, M., & Koch, I. (2007a). Inhibitory processes in language switching: Evidence from switching language-defined response sets. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 19, 395–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Philipp, A. M., Jolicoeur, P., Falkenstein, M., & Koch, I. (2007b). Response selection and response execution in task switching: Evidence from a go-signal paradigm. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 33, 1062–1075.Google ScholarPubMed
Roelofs, A. (2006). Functional architecture of naming dice, digits, and number words. Language and Cognitive Processes, 21, 78–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schuch, S., & Koch, I. (2003). The role of response selection for inhibition of task sets in task shifting. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 92–105.Google ScholarPubMed
Schulpen, B., Dijkstra, T., Schriefers, H. J., & Haspers, M. (2003). Recognition of interlingual homophones in bilingual auditory word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 29, 1155–1178.Google ScholarPubMed
Smith, M. C., & Magee, L. E. (1980). Tracing the time course of picture–word processing. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 109, 373–392.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verhoef, K. M. W., Roelofs, A., & Chwilla, D. J. (2009). Role of inhibition in language switching: Evidence from event-related brain potentials in overt picture naming. Cognition, 110, 84–99.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verhoef, K. M. W., Roelofs, A., & Chwilla, D. J. (2010). Electrophysiological evidence for endogenous control of attention in switching between languages in overt picturenaming. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 22, 1832–1843.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waszak, F., Hommel, B., & Allport, A. (2003). Task-switching and long-term priming: Role of episodic stimulus – task bindings in task-shift costs. Cognitive Psychology, 46, 361–413.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed