The dual-task condition is more difficult than the single-task condition, with a condition-by-modality interaction in reaction time¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2011 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? The single task was performed more rapidly than the dual task, with a main effect of modality and a condition-by-modality interaction. → Bialystok Ellen 2011 q3 i? Accuracy showed a main effect of condition and a condition-by-modality interaction. → Bialystok Ellen 2011 (2)

Evidence¶

Bialystok Ellen 2011¶

Bialystok Ellen. (2011). Coordination of Executive Functions in Monolingual and Bilingual Children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3139691/

q3 · i? · associational · r2

3-way ANOVA on reaction times for language group, condition, and modality. "There was a main effect of condition in which the single task was performed more rapidly than the dual task, F (1, 60) = 152.48, p < .0001", plus a condition-by-modality interaction.

"There was a main effect of condition in which the single task was performed more rapidly than the dual task, F (1, 60) = 152.48, p < .0001, a main effect of modality, F (1, 60) = 11.56, p < .001, and an interaction of condition and modality, F (1, 60) = 145.01, p < .0001"

Bialystok Ellen 2011 (2)¶

Bialystok Ellen. (2011). Coordination of Executive Functions in Monolingual and Bilingual Children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3139691/

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Omnibus 3-way ANOVA on accuracy scores. "A 3-way ANOVA for language group, condition, and modality on accuracy scores revealed an effect of language group, F (1, 61) = 4.26, p < .04, condition, F (1, 61) = 157.96, p < .0001", with modality-by-language and condition-by-modality interactions.

"A 3-way ANOVA for language group, condition, and modality on accuracy scores revealed an effect of language group, F (1, 61) = 4.26, p < .04, condition, F (1, 61) = 157.96, p < .0001, and interactions of modality and language, F (1, 61) = 5.07, p < .02, and condition and modality, F (1, 61) = 9.18, p < .004"

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Match trials are more accurate and faster than mismatch trials in the dual-modality task, with no language group difference — related
• Monolingual and bilingual children perform comparably on single-modality classification tasks in accuracy and speed — related
• Bilingual children show no reaction time cost for their dual-task accuracy advantage — related
• Relational integration is less accurate and slower than single-relation matching regardless of audience or age — related
• More bilingual than monolingual children pass the 60% accuracy criterion on the visual dual-task, but not on the auditory dual-task — related
• Bilingual children maintain higher accuracy than monolingual children in a dual-modality classification task, with the advantage limited to the visual task — related
• Adolescents with ADHD respond more slowly than non-ADHD peers across all conditions, and color-shape binding slows responses in both groups — related