Phonological processing is affected by and affects language control in switching, though effects are not uniform across studies¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · review r3 · q2
Currency · newest study 2015 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Switch trials produce a more pronounced non-target-language accent, indicating phonological processing is affected by language switching. → Mathieu Declerck & Andrea M. Philipp 2015 q2 i? Cognate status effects on switch costs reverse depending on block composition, and phonological overlap across trials changes the switch cost asymmetry. → Mathieu Declerck & Andrea M. Philipp 2015 (2)

Evidence¶

Mathieu Declerck & Andrea M. Philipp 2015¶

Mathieu Declerck & Andrea M. Philipp. (2015). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychon Bull Rev. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0836-1

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports, citing Goldrick, Runnqvist, and Costa (2014), that "a more pronounced Spanish accent in switch trials than in repetition trials" occurred for English words, while Olson (2013) found the opposite pattern for Spanish words. Either pattern indicates phonological processing is affected by switching.

"Goldrick, Runnqvist, and Costa ( 2014) observed that Spanish-English bilinguals produced English words with a more pronounced Spanish accent in switch trials than in repetition trials."

Mathieu Declerck & Andrea M. Philipp 2015 (2)¶

Mathieu Declerck & Andrea M. Philipp. (2015). A review of control processes and their locus in language switching. Psychon Bull Rev. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-015-0836-1

q2 · i? · review · r3

The review reports, citing Declerck and Philipp (2015b) on words sharing the first two phonemes with the previous trial, that "phonological overlap changed the switch cost asymmetry between L1 and L2," supporting a phonological role in persisting control effects. Cognate effects also reversed between separate versus mixed blocks.

"The results showed that phonological overlap changed the switch cost asymmetry between L1 and L2."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Concept preparation reduces L1 switch costs, indicating language control can initiate at the concept level
• Orthographic specificity moderates comprehension-based switching costs: language-specific orthography can abolish or alter mixing and switch costs
• Sentence-level (lemma) processing affects language switching: switch costs occur between sentences and depend on syntactic structure
• Asymmetrical switch costs are not an unambiguous marker of inhibition: they depend on task type and bilingual profile, and admit non-inhibitory explanations
• Switch costs and mixing costs are common empirical observations across language switching paradigms, except voluntary switching under certain circumstances
• The central executive coordinates WM subsystems and supports higher-level language-learning functions such as attention switching and strategy switching — related