1. Presentation by Hanh Dinh and Beverly Beaudette
What causes the bilingual disadvantage in verbal fluency? The dual-task analogy
By Tiffany C. Sandoval, Tamar H. Gollan, Victor S. Ferriera, and David P. Salmon
-Beverly intro
Presentation by Hanh Dinh and Beverly Beaudette

2. The Bilingual Disadvantage
Literature Review
The Bilingual Disadvantage
1. Bilinguals vs. Monolinguals
Name fewer pictures (Robert et al., 2002)
Name pictures more slowly (Gollan et al., 2005)
More tip-of-the-tongue retrieval failures (Gollan & Silberberg, 2001)
2. Among bilinguals (dominant vs. non-dominant language)
Reduced verbal fluency in even dominant and first-learned language (Gollan et al., 2005; Ransdell, 1987)
Beverly; edited, done

3. Supporting the dual-task analogy Opposing the dual-task analogy
Theory 1: Retrieval slowing with interference between languages: the dual-task analogy
Simultaneously retrieve target language exemplars while controlling interference from non-target language
Supporting the dual-task analogy
Opposing the dual-task analogy
Language mixing has a strong effect on dominant language production (Meuter and Allport, 1999)
Dominance reversal (Christoffels et al., 2007)
Dominance reversal implies inhibitory control of dominant language during language mixing (Kroll et al., 2008; Gollan & Ferriera, 2009)
Dominant language is immune to the competition (Gollan et al., 2005)
Especially related to balanced bilinguals (Costa and Santesteban, 2004)
Plays a limited (or no) role in picture naming in the dominant language (Finkbeiner et al., 2006; Gollan et al., 2008)
-Beverly
Edited, done

4. Theory 2: Retrieval slowing without interference - the weaker links account
What are the weaker links? (use each language relatively less than monolinguals)
Supporting studies: bilinguals have more disadvantages with low-frequency picture names (Gollan et al, 2008) + more slowly + affect strongly on non- dominant language => less likely to retrieve low-frequency than monolinguals
versus among high-frequency interference
=> call for more verbal fluency tasks in research design
Hanh

5. Theory 3: The reduced vocabulary hypothesis: the category size analogy
What is the category size analogy?
Supporting studies: bilinguals score slower than monolinguals on vocab test (Craik & Luk, 2008); take more time to retrieve words (Gollan and Silverberg, 2001)
=> again, the advantage of language production test (verbal fluency tasks)
=> predict that the disadvantage of bilinguals will happen at the end of the test
-Hanh

6. Measuring the time-course of retrieval
The average time to produce each response for single and dual tasks (Rohrer, 1995) for monolinguals
“Fulcrum point”: the balance (spread) of responses in terms of when they occur across the fluency trial
Retrieval time using PsyScope response box
-Hanh

7. Idealized “fulcrum point” for hypothesis 1 and 2
-Hanh

8. Experiment 1: Methodology: Instruments
30 English-speaking monolinguals and 24 English-Spanish bilinguals
15 semantic categories (with smaller subsets) and 24 double-letter categories were alternatively used in the testing
Participants were asked to:
name as many examples of things they could think of in one minute
not use the same word with a different ending
Beverly edited, done

9. Results and Discussion
Supported the dual-task analogy of the bilingual fluency disadvantage:
fewer correct response
slower first response times
right - shifted fulcrum points
Hypothesis 3 (Reduced Vocabulary) refuted: Right-shifted fulcrum points demonstrated bilinguals’ vocabulary was not exhausted more quickly
Hypothesis 2 (Weaker Links) refuted: Bilinguals produced more low-frequency words than monolinguals
Beverly edited, done

10. I will discuss this slide if we need more material!
Edited done

11. Experiment 2: Methodology: Instruments
A debate on: “interference is greater in non-dominant language production than it is for the dominant language” (Kroll, 2008) or the dominant language is immune to the interference and no need to inhibit the non-dominant? The activation facilitate more than interfere?
45 Spanish-English bilinguals (English dominant)
12 semantic categories
= “...the dominant language is immune to interference from the non-dominant language”

12. Results and Discussion:

14. Results & Discussion
Non-dominant language – Spanish: fewer correct responses, slower responses, longer fulcrum points; emerging early of the trial
=> There is between-language interference; it is greater during the production of non-dominant language (supported the dual-task analogy )
=> Language dominance effects are quite consistent across different categories
Relatively similar error rates

15. Conclusion & Contributions
Bilinguals are not able to “shut off” activation of non-target language and function like monolingual speakers
Bilinguals will always be most fluent when tested under conditions that minimize dual-language activation
The option to use either language frees bilinguals from production in only one language, but also burdens them with choosing
Language switching may even lead bilinguals to have even lower verbal fluency scores
Delete slide when done getting info

16. Discussion Questions
What do you think about this study? Is it persuasive? Do you think there are some limitations or challenges?
Can you give some practical examples (maybe from your language teaching) regarding to these disadvantages of bilinguals in verbal fluency? Do you think the teachers can help students who have those disadvantages? How?
Delete slide when done getting info