The importance of neuroscience in understanding bilingual cognitive control.
The importance of neuroscience in understanding bilingual cognitive control.
复制标题
神经科学在理解双语认知控制方面的重要性。
DOI：
10.1016/j.cortex.2015.06.010
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
Hernandez,ArturoE
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Vaughn,KellyA;Greene,MayaR;RamosNuñez,AuroraI;Hernandez,ArturoE
双语研究的历史已经从一般智力测量方面的双语劣势(例如Peal和Lambert，1962)转变为在非语言认知控制任务上的双语优势(例如Bialystok，2005)。最近，有关双语者有优势的研究受到了肯尼斯·帕普及其同事的质疑(Costa，Hernández，Costa-Faidella，&Sebastian-Galles，2009；Dunabieta et al.，2014；Paap，2014；Paap，Johnson，&Sawi，2013；Paap，Johnson，&Sawi，2014；Paap，Sawi，Dalibar，Darrow&Johnson，2014)。由于双方都有证据和合理的论点，我们建议现在不再把双语者视为一个比单一语言者更好或更差的群体，而是应该关注他们不同的语言经历如何有助于我们理解语言和认知之间的关系。此外，我们建议应用神经成像技术，以便更好地了解神经发育、结构和功能如何作为连接语言和认知的机制--传统行为方法无法检验的新的令人兴奋的假设。我们同意Paap和他的同事的观点，即试图用神经科学证据来支持双语优势的想法是没有根据的，因为仍然不清楚神经活动更多还是更少更好。我们不应该关注双语者的神经优势，而应该进行神经成像研究，调查双语者的语言发展、神经发育和认知发展之间的关系，而不是只研究一种语言。在理解神经成像数据的意义上，我们不同意作者的观点，即必须建立双语者和单一语言者之间的行为差异。以双语者和单语者的言语知觉研究为例(ArChila-Suerte，Zevin，&Hernandez，2013)。英语单语儿童通过双侧大脑感知区域--颞上回--来感知英语语音。年轻的西班牙语-英语双语儿童(6-8岁)在感知英语语音时会招募相同的区域，但年龄较大的双语儿童(9-10岁)会招募大脑中通常与认知控制相关的额外区域，如额中回和顶下小叶，以执行相同的任务。在感知或产生英语语音方面，这个年龄段的双语儿童与单语儿童没有什么不同，但他们在这项任务中的神经活动有所不同。换句话说，这些发现并不表明双语者的优势或劣势，但它们表明
The history of bilingual research has shifted from a bilingual disadvantage on general intelligence measures (eg Peal and Lambert, 1962) to a bilingual advantage on non-verbal cognitive control tasks (eg Bialystok, 2005). Recently, research suggesting that there is an advantage for bilinguals has been called into question by Kenneth Paap and his colleagues, among others (Costa, Hernández, Costa-Faidella, & Sebastian-Galles, 2009; Dunabieta et al., 2014; Paap, 2014; Paap & Greenberg, 2013; Paap, Johnson, & Sawi, 2014; Paap & Sawi, 2014; Paap, Sawi, Dalibar, Darrow, & Johnson, 2014). As evidence and reasonable arguments exist on both sides, we suggest it is time to stop regarding bilinguals as a group that is better or worse than monolinguals, and to focus on how their varied language experiences can contribute to our understanding of the relationship between language and cognition. In addition, we propose that neuroimaging techniques should be implemented in order to better understand how neurological development, structure, and function might serve as mechanisms connecting language and cognition—new and exciting hypotheses that cannot be examined with traditional behavioral methods. We agree with Paap and his colleagues that it is uninformative to attempt to support the idea of a bilingual advantage with neuroscience evidence, as it is still unclear whether more or less neural activity is better. Rather than focusing on a neurological advantage for bilinguals, we should conduct neuroimaging studies that investigate the relationship between language development, neurological development, and cognitive development within bilinguals in ways that may not be evident by only studying monolinguals.In making sense of neuroimaging data, we disagree with the authors that behavioral differences between bilinguals and monolinguals must be established. Consider, as an analogy, a study on speech perception in bilinguals and monolinguals (Archila-Suerte, Zevin, & Hernandez, 2013). English monolingual children recruit, bilaterally, the superior temporal gyrus, a perceptual region of the brain, to perceive English speech sounds. Young Spanish-English bilingual children (ages 6–8) recruit the same regions when perceiving English speech sounds, but older bilingual children (ages 9–10) recruit additional regions of the brain commonly associated with cognitive control, such as the middle frontal gyrus and the inferior parietal lobule, to perform the same task. Bilingual children at this age do not differ from monolingual children when it comes to perceiving or producing English speech sounds, but their neural activity is different during this task. In other words, these findings are not indicative of an advantage or disadvantage for bilinguals, but they indicate that there