Psychonomic Bulletin & Review

, Volume 21, Issue 2, pp 520–525 | Cite as

Novel evidence in support of the bilingual advantage: Influences of task demands and experience on cognitive control and working memory

  • Brooke N. MacnamaraEmail author
  • Andrew R. A. Conway
Brief Report


The bilingual advantage—enhanced cognitive control relative to monolinguals—possibly occurs due to experience engaging general cognitive mechanisms in order to manage two languages. Supporting this hypothesis is evidence that bimodal (signed language–spoken language) bilinguals do not demonstrate such an advantage, presumably because the distinct language modalities reduce conflict and control demands. We hypothesized that the mechanism responsible for the bilingual advantage is the interplay between (a) the magnitude of bilingual management demands and (b) the amount of experience managing those demands. We recruited adult bimodal bilinguals with high bilingual management demands and examined cognitive control and working memory capacity longitudinally. After gaining experience managing high bilingual management demands, participants outperformed themselves from 2 years earlier on cognitive abilities associated with managing the bilingual demands. These results suggest that cognitive control outcomes for bilinguals vary as a function of the mechanisms recruited during bilingual management and the amount of experience managing the bilingual demands.


Bilingual advantage Working memory Cognitive control Simultaneous interpreting 


Author note

We thank Eileen Forrestal, Cynthia Williams, David Rivera, Rob Hills, Vanessa Watson, Ashley Graham, and the participants in this study for their time and effort.

Supplementary material

13423_2013_524_MOESM1_ESM.docx (121 kb)
ESM 1 (DOCX 120 kb)


  1. Barac, R., & Bialystok, E. (2012). Bilingual effects on cognitive and linguistic development: Role of language, cultural background, and education. Child Development, 83, 413–422.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Berg, E. A. (1948). A simple objective technique for measuring flexibility in thinking. Journal of General Psychology, 39, 15–22.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bialystok, E. (1999). Cognitive complexity and attentional control in the bilingual mind. Child Development, 70, 636–644.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bialystok, E. (2009). Claiming evidence from non-evidence: A reply to Morton and Harper. Developmental Science, 12, 499–501. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00868.x PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bialystok, E., & Craik, F. I. M. (2010). Cognitive and linguistic processing in the bilingual mind. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 19, 19–23. doi: 10.1177/0963721409358571 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Calabria, M., Hernández, M., Branzi, F. M., & Costa, A. (2011). Qualitative differences between bilingual language control and executive control: Evidence from task-switching. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 399. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00399 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cattell, R. B., Cattell, A. K. S., & Institute for Personality and Ability Testing. (1960). Measuring intelligence with the culture fair tests. Champaign, IL: Institute for Personality and Ability Testing.Google Scholar
  8. Christoffels, I. K., & de Groot, A. M. B. (2005). Simultaneous interpreting: A cognitive perspective. In J. F. Kroll & A. M. B. de Groot (Eds.), Handbook of bilingualism: Psycholinguistic approaches (pp. 326–348). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Emmorey, K., Borinstein, H. B., Thompson, R., & Gollan, T. H. (2008a). Bimodal bilingualism. Bilingualism, 11, 43–61. doi: 10.1017/S1366728907003203 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Emmorey, K., Luk, G., Pyers, J. E., & Bialystok, E. (2008b). The source of enhanced cognitive control in bilinguals: Evidence from bimodal bilinguals. Psychological Science, 19, 1201–1206.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Festman, J., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., & Münte, T. F. (2010). Individual differences in control of language interference in late bilinguals are mainly related to general executive abilities. Behavioral and Brain Functions, 6(5), 1–12. doi: 10.1186/1744-9081-6-5 Google Scholar
  12. Gerver, D. (1976). Empirical studies of simultaneous interpretation: A review and a model. In R. W. Briskin (Ed.), Translation: Applications and research (pp. 165–207). New York, NY: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
  13. Gile, D. (1997). Conference interpreting as a cognitive management problem. In J. H. Danks, G. M. Shreve, S. B. Fountain, & M. K. McBeath (Eds.), Cognitive processes in translation and interpreting (pp. 196–214). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  14. Green, D. W. (1998). Mental control of the bilingual lexico-semantic system. Bilingualism, 1, 67–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kroll, J. F., Bobb, S. C., Misra, M., & Guo, T. (2008). Language selection in bilingual speech: Evidence for inhibitory processes. Acta Psychologica, 128, 416–430.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Lambert, S. (1992). Shadowing. Meta, 37, 263–273.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Morton, J. B., & Harper, S. N. (2007). What did Simon say? Revisiting the bilingual advantage. Developmental Science, 10, 719–726.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Oberauer, K. (2004). The measurement of working memory capacity. In O. Wilhelm & R. W. Engle (Eds.), Handbook of understanding and measuring intelligence (pp. 393–408). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  19. Paap, K. R., & Greenberg, Z. I. (2013). There is no coherent evidence for a bilingual advantage in executive processing. Cognitive Psychology, 66, 232–258.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Padilla, P., Bajo, M. T., Cañas, J. J., & Padilla, F. (1995). Cognitive processes of memory in simultaneous interpretation. In J. Tommola (Ed.), Topics in interpreting research (pp. 61–72). Turku, Finland: University of Turku.Google Scholar
  21. Prior, A., & Gollan, T. H. (2011). Good language-switchers are good task-switchers: Evidence from Spanish–English and Mandarin–English bilinguals. Journal of International Neuropsychological Society, 17, 682–691.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Pyers, J. E., & Emmorey, K. (2008). The face of bimodal bilingualism. Psychological Science, 19, 531.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Raven, J. C. (1962). Advanced progressive matrices: Sets I and II. London, UK: H. K. Lewis.Google Scholar
  24. Salthouse, T. A., & Babcock, R. L. (1991). Decomposing adult age differences in working memory. Developmental Psychology, 27, 763–776. doi: 10.1037/0012-1649.27.5.763 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Salthouse, T. A., Toth, J., Daniels, K., Parks, C., Pak, R., Wolbrette, M., & Hocking, K. J. (2000). Effects of aging on efficiency of task switching in a variant of the trail making test. Neuropsychology, 14, 102–111.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Salthouse, T. A., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2008). Implications of short-term retest effects for the interpretation of longitudinal change. Neuropsychology, 22, 800–811.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Soveri, A., Rodriguez-Fornells, A., & Laine, M. (2011). Is there a relationship between bilingual language switching and executive functions? Introducing a within-group analysis approach. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 183. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00183 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 498–505. doi: 10.3758/BF03192720 PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Wechsler, D. (1997). Wechsler adult intelligence scale—WAIS III (3rd ed.). San Antonio, TX: Harcourt Assessment.Google Scholar
  30. Yudes, C., Macizo, P., & Bajo, T. (2011). The influence of expertise in simultaneous interpreting on non-verbal executive processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 309. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00309 PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Yudes, C., Macizo, P., & Bajo, T. (2012). Coordinating comprehension and production in simultaneous interpreters: Evidence from the articulatory suppression effect. Bilingualism, 15, 329–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Psychology DepartmentPrinceton UniversityPrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations