Psychological Research

, Volume 77, Issue 6, pp 728–737 | Cite as

Bilingualism and the increased attentional blink effect: evidence that the difference between bilinguals and monolinguals generalizes to different levels of second language proficiency

  • Vatsala Khare
  • Ark Verma
  • Bhoomika Kar
  • Narayanan Srinivasan
  • Marc Brysbaert
Original Article

Abstract

The attentional blink task involves rapid serial presentation of visual stimuli, two of which the participants have to report. The usual finding is that participants are impaired at reporting the second target if it appears in close temporal proximity to the first target. Previous research has shown that the effect is stronger in bilinguals than monolinguals. We investigated whether the difference between monolinguals and proficient bilinguals can be extended to bilinguals of different proficiency levels. Therefore, we replicated the paradigm in a large sample of Hindi–English bilinguals with different proficiency levels of English, as measured with a validated vocabulary test. We additionally measured the participants’ intelligence with the raven progressive matrices. We found that the size of the attentional blink effect correlates with the degree of second language proficiency and not with the degree of intelligence. This indicates that research on executive control functions can be done with bilinguals of different proficiency levels. Our results are also in line with recent findings showing that the attentional blink effect is not primarily due to limited processing resources.

References

  1. Akyürek, E. G., Eshuis, S. A. H., Nieuwenstein, M. R., Saija, J. D., Başkent, D., & Hommel, B. (2012). Temporal Target Integration Underlies Performance at Lag 1 in the Attentional Blink. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 1-17. doi:10.1037/a0027610.
  2. Akyürek, E. G., & Hommel, B. (2005). Short-term memory and the attentional blink: Capacity versus content. Memory Cognition, 33(4), 254–263.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bialystok, E. (1999). Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual mind. Child Development, 70, 636–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bialystok, E. (2001). Bilingualism in development: Language, literacy, and cognition. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Green, D. W., & Gollan, T. H. (2009). Bilingual Minds. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 10(3), 89–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., Klein, R., & Viswanathan, M. (2004). Bilingualism, aging and cognitive control: Evidence from the Simon task. Psychology and Aging, 19, 290–303.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bialystok, E., Craik, F. I. M., & Ruocco, A. C. (2006). Dual-modality monitoring in a classification task: The effects of bilingualism and ageing. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 59(11), 1968–1983.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bialystok, E., & Martin, M. (2004). Attention and inhibition in bilingual children: Evidence from the dimensional change card sort task. Developmental Science, 7, 325–339.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bialystok, E., & Shapero, D. (2005). Ambiguous benefits: The effect of bilingualism on reversing ambiguous figures. Developmental Science, 8, 595–604.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bowman, H., & Wyble, B. (2007). The simultaneous type, serial token model of temporal attention and working memory. Psychological Review, 114(1), 38–70. doi:10.1037/0033-295X.114.1.38.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Broadbent, D. E., & Broadbent, M. H. P. (1987). From detection to identification: Response to multiple targets in rapid serial visual presentation. Attention, Perception & Psychophysics, 42(2), 105–113.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brysbaert, M. & Dijkstra T. (2006). Changing views on word recognition in bilinguals. In Morais J. and d’Ydewalle (Eds) Bilingualism and Second Language Acquisition.Brussels.Google Scholar
  13. Chee, M. W. L., Hon, N., Lee, H. L., & Soon, C. S. (2001). Relative language proficiency modulates BOLD signal change when Bilinguals perform semantic judgments. NeuroImage, 13, 1155–1163.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Chun, M. M., & Potter, M. C. (1995). A two-stage model for multiple target detection in rapid serial visual presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 21(1), 109–127. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.21.1.109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Colzato, L. S., Bajo, M. T., van den Wildenberg, W., Paolieri, D., Nieuwenhuis, S., La Heij, W., et al. (2008). How does bilingualism improve executive control? A comparison of active and reactive inhibition mechanisms. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 302–312.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Colzato, L. S., Spape`, M., Pannebakker, M. M., & Hommel, B. (2007). Working memory and the attentional blink: Blink size is predicted by individual differences in operation span. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 1051–1057.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Costa, A. (2005).Lexical access in bilingual production. InJ. F. Kroll & A. M. B. De Groot (eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 308–325).New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  18. Craik, F. I. M., & Bialystok, E. (2006). Cognition through the lifespan: Mechanisms of change. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10, 131–138.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Dash, T. & Kar, B. R. (2012). Characterizing language proficiency in Hindi and English language: Implications for bilingual research. International journal of mind brain and cognition. Google Scholar
  20. Dell-Acqua, R., Dux, P. E., Wybe, B., & Joliceur, P. (2012). Sparing from the attentional blink is not spared from structural limitations. Psychonomic Bulletin Review, 19, 232–238.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Di Lollo, V., Kawahara, J., Ghorashi, S. M. S., & Enns, J. T. (2005). The attentional blink: Resource depletion or temporary loss of control? Psychological Research, 69, 191–200. doi:10.1007/s00426-004-0173-x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Dux, P. E., & Harris, I. M. (2007). On the failure of distractor inhibition in the attentional blink. Psychonomic Bulletin Review, 14(4), 723–728.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Dux, P. E., & Marois, R. (2008). Distractor inhibition predicts individual differences in the attentional blink. PLoS ONE, 3(10), e3330. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0003330.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Dux, P. E., & Marois, R. (2009). The attentional blink: a review of data and theory. Attention, Perception, & Psychophysics, 71(8), 1683–1700.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Francis, W. S. (1999). Analogical transfer of problem solutions within and between languages in Spanish-English bilinguals. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 301–329.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Grainger, J. (1993). Visual word lexicon in bilinguals. In R. Schreuder & B. Weltens (Eds.), The bilingual lexicon (pp. 11–25). Amsterdam: John Benjamins.Google Scholar
  27. Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 1, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Husain, M., & Rorden, C. (2003). Non-spatially lateralized mechanisms in hemispatial neglect. Nature Reviews| Neuroscience, 4(1), 26–36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Joliceur, P. (1998). Modulation of the attentional blink by on-line response selection: Evidence from speeded and unspeeded task decisions. Memory & Cognition, 26, 1014–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jolicoeur, P. (1999). Restricted attentional capacity between sensory modalities. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 6(1), 87–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kar, B. R. (In press). Language and Cognitive Control in the Context of Bilingualism: Independent and Shared Mechanisms. In M. Panda and P. Padakannaya (Eds), Cognition in multilingual society. New Delhi: Orient Black Swan.Google Scholar
  32. Kelly, A. J., & Dux, P. E. (2011). Different attentional blink tasks reflect distinct information processing limitations: An individual differences approach. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 37(6), 1867–1873.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kroll, J. F., & de Groot, A. M. B. (1997). Lexical and conceptual memory in the bilingual: Mapping form to meaning in two languages. In A. M. B. de Groot & J. F. Kroll (Eds.), Tutorials in bilingualism (pp. 169–199). Mahwah: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  34. La Heij, W. (2005). Selection processes in monolingual and bilingual lexical access. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 289–307). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  35. Lahar, C. J., Isaak, M. I., & McArthur, A. D. (2001). Age differences in the magnitude of the attentional blink. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 8(2), 149–159.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Lemhoefer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavioral Research, 44, 325–343. doi:10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Marian, V., Spivey, M., & Hirsch, J. (2003). Shared and separate systems in bilingual language processing: Converging evidence from eyetracking and brain imaging. Brain and Language, 86, 70–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Martens, S., & Johnson, A. (2009). Working memory capacity, intelligence, and the magnitude of the attentional blink revisited. Experimental Brain Research, 192, 43–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Martens, S., & Wyble, B. (2010). The attentional blink: Past, present, and future of a blind spot in perceptual awareness. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 34, 947–957.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Meuter, R., & Allport, A. (1999). Bilingual language switching in naming: Asymmetrical costs of language selection. Journal of Memory and Language, 40, 25–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Michael, E. B., & Gollan, T. H. (2005). Being and Becoming a bilingual: Individual differences and consequences for language production. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 389–408). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  42. Myers-Scotton, C. (2005). Supporting a differential access hypothesis: Code switching and other contact data. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 326–348). New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Niedeggen, M., Michael, L., & Hesselman, G. (2012). Closing the gates to consciousness: Distractors activate a central inhibition process. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 24(6), 1294–1304.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Nieuwenstein, M. R., & Potter, M. C. (2006). Temporal limits of selection and memory encoding a comparison of whole versus partial report in rapid serial visual presentation. Psychological Science, 17(6), 471–475.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Olivers, C. N. L., & Meeter, M. (2008). A boost and bounce theory of temporal attention. Psychological Review, 115(4), 836–863.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Olivers, C. N. L., & Nieuwenhuis, S. T. (2005). The beneficial effect of concurrent task-irrelevant mental activity on temporal attention. Psychological Science, 16, 265–269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Olivers, C. N. L., van der Stigchel, S., & Hulleman, J. (2007). Spreading the sparing: Against a limited-capacity account of the attentional blink. Psychological Research, 71, 126–139.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Perani, D., Paulesu, E., Galles, N. S., Dupoux, E., Dehaene, S., Bettinardi, V., et al. (1998). The bilingual brain—Proficiency and age of acquisition of the second language. Brain, 121, 1841–1852.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Pollack, I., & Norman, D.A. (1964).A nonparametric analysis of recognition experiments.Psychonomic Science, 1, 125-126.Google Scholar
  50. Potter, M. C., Chun, M. M., Banks, B. S., & Muckenhoupt, M. (1998). Two attentional deficits in serial target search: The visual attentional blink and an amodal task-switch deficit. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 24(4), 979–992.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Potter, M. C., Staub, A., & O’Connor, D. H. (2002). The time course of competition for attention: Attention is initially labile. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 28(5), 1149–1162. doi:10.1037/0096-1523.28.5.1149.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Potter, M.C., Nieuwenstein, M., & Strohminger, N. (2008). Whole report versus partial report in RSVP sentences. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(4), 907–915.Google Scholar
  53. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Manual for Raven’s progressive matrices and vocabulary scales. Oxford: Oxford Psychologists Press.Google Scholar
  54. Raymond, J. E., Shapiro, K. L., & Arnell, K. M. (1992). Temporary suppression of visual processing in an RSVP task: An attentional blink? Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 849–860.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Rodriguez-Fornells, A., van der Lugt, A., Rotte, M., Britti, B., Heinze, H. J., & Muente, T. F. (2005). Second language interferes with word production in fluent bilinguals: Brain potential and Functional imaging evidence. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 17, 422–433.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Shapiro, K. L., Raymond, J. E., & Arnell, K. M. (1994). Attention to visual pattern information produces the attentional blink in rapid serial visual presentation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 20(2), 357–371.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Shapiro, K. L., Schmitz, F., Martens, S., Hommel, B., & Schnitzler, A. (2006). Resource sharing in the attentional blink. NeuroReport, 17, 163–166.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Stanislaw, H., & Todorov, N. (1999). Calculation of signal detection theory measures. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 31(1), 137–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Taatgen, N. A., Juvina, I., Schipper, M., Borst, J. P., & Martens, S. (2009). Too much control can hurt: A threaded cognition model of the attentional blink. Cognitive Psychology, 59, 1–29.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Visser, T. A. W., Bischof, W. F., & Di Lollo, V. (1999). Attentional switching in the spatial and nonspatial domains: evidence from the attentional blink. Psychological Bulletin, 125(4), 458–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Ward, R., & Duncan, J. (1996). The slow time course of visual attention. Cognitive Psychology, 30, 79–109.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Weichselgartner, E., & Sperling, G. (1987). Dynamics of automatic and controlled visual attention. Science, 238, 778–780.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Wierda, S. M., van Rijn, H., Taatgen, N. A., & Martens, S. (2010). Distracting the mind improves performance: An ERP study. PLoS ONE, 5(11), e15024. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0015024.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Wyble, B., Potter, M. C., Bowman, H., & Nieuwenstein, M. (2011). Attentional episodes in visual perception. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140(3), 488–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. Zied, K. M., Phillipe, A., Karine, P., Valerie, H.-T., Ghislaine, A., Arnaud, R., et al. (2004). Bilingualism and adult differences in inhibitory mechanisms: Evidence from a bilingual strooptask. Brain and Cognition, 54, 254–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Vatsala Khare
    • 1
  • Ark Verma
    • 1
  • Bhoomika Kar
    • 2
  • Narayanan Srinivasan
    • 2
  • Marc Brysbaert
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Experimental Psychology, FPPWGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Centre of Cognitive and Behavioral SciencesUniversity of AllahabadAllahabadIndia

Personalised recommendations