Investigating Bilingualism and Its Effects on Working Memory Processes

This report investigates the cognitive advantages of bilingualism, focusing on its impact on working memory. The study explores the relationship between bilingualism and cognitive performance by comparing monolinguals and bilinguals. It delves into the benefits of bilingualism, including enhanced executive control, improved concentration, and better problem-solving skills. The research examines the effects of bilingualism on verbal and non-verbal tasks, considering factors such as age and language similarity. The report highlights that bilinguals often outperform monolinguals in executive control tasks and are better at predicting behavior. The study utilizes a diverse sample of participants, including English-Arabic speakers, to analyze the cognitive processes involved in language switching and memory. The findings suggest that bilingualism offers significant cognitive advantages, particularly in areas related to working memory and cognitive flexibility. The report contributes to the understanding of how language proficiency shapes cognitive abilities and provides insights into the benefits of bilingualism in various aspects of life.

KEY TRANSFERABLE
SKILLS
1

Table of Contents
IS BILINGUAL ADVANTAGEOUS FOR WORKING MEMORY......................................................1
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................... 1
Researches evident in this field.................................................................................................................. 1
Benefits of bilingualism................................................................................................................................. 3
RATIONALE OF THE STUDY............................................................................................................... 1
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY.............................................................................................................. 2
Participants....................................................................................................................................................... 2
Materials............................................................................................................................................................. 2
Methods.............................................................................................................................................................. 3
REFERENCES............................................................................................................................................................... 5
2

IS BILINGUAL ADVANTAGEOUS FOR WORKING MEMORY
INTRODUCTION
The nervous system of a person uses to learn continuously among which experience is the major
factor. It is evident that many types of research have been done which reflects that there is a link
between brain's knowledge gaining system and Bilingualism. The bilingualism refers to the
ability to use two languages by a single person. It is also seen that the expertise in both languages
exists in a fluctuating manner in an adult and children. This professionalism over language
comes by opportunities acquired by a person towards languages and also the impact that may
have on the individual by others. It is apparent that there is a close connection between a person
gains the learning and his bilingualism. This relation has been explained by Green where he
proposed a theory of inhibitory control. According to theory, a child starts to learn numerous
things from his social environment (Loe & Feldman (2016). It is also seen that the mental state
of children starts changing and after some time they become able to judge and predict the
behaviours which are termed as the theory of mind (ToM). There are some measures that are
used for analysing the developmental pattern in ToM among which the major one is false belief
tasks. The false belief tasks are based on the conceptual framework and use to develop critically
(Bloch, 2013). Here, the changes occur due to some mistaken beliefs which gradually children
learns to differentiate. The major role in all these learnings is completely dependent on
languages. The ToM is not possible without the use of languages. The foremost thing that
differentiates a human from other animals is the ability to make use of languages and understand
the views and feelings of other persons. Other scholars like Archila-Suerte, P., & et.al., (2013)
have also observed that the language plays an important role in the development of mind.
Researches evident in this field
From the researchers, it was found that in the case of children who are in developing age there
is a very close relationship between his mind and the ability to use language in it. Apart from
this, many researchers have studied children who have the ability to make use of two languages.
In other words, bilingualism is very common in childhood days, because of which it has
remained a topic of interest among researchers. For this various tests were organised so that the
pattern of learning and the cognitive process can be analysed in both monolinguals and bilinguals
(Casaponsa, Carreiras & Duñabeitia, 2014). For this, the studies were conducted where different

verbal and non-verbal tasks were arranged for testing it on monolinguals and bilinguals. The
priority of this test was to examine the performances of both types of persons who are in the
impact of different situations of languages. From the results, it was found by the scholars that
performance of bilinguals was poorer as compared to monolinguals in the case of verbal tasks.
For instance, the in the tests of picture naming the presentation of bilingual people was slow, and
they were nit able to give accurate answers. While on the other hand, the performance of
monolinguals was fine and their smoothness in tasks of verbal nature was far better than
bilinguals. Besides this, it was also seen that the age also has an impacting role in these tasks, but
the performance was largely dependent on conditions of task (Humphries, & et.al., 2014). All the
above factors raised a conflicting situation between two linguistic units as both were activated on
a parallel basis. However, with the help of inhibitory control model, it was discovered that these
issues raising between both active units are not completely dependent on language. Because of
this, further researches were done to find out the benefits of bilingualism (Knight & Swanwick,
2013).
The researches and studies conducted to find advantages of bilingualism were related with
various kinds of tasks that were based on different conditions. They found that, in the case of
Stroop and Flanker tasks, the time taken by bilinguals in giving reaction was less. In a case of
inhibition tasks, performance was dependent on age factors. The younger age people were able to
perform better as compared to older ones in Simon, Flanker and Stroop tasks (Lauchlan, Parisi &
Fadda, 2013). The results of these tests were somewhat inconsistent as the persons used for the
sample were of different ages and number of trials done to test them was also alleged. Later on,
many scholars stated that there are possibilities of increasing conflicts for bilinguals if both
languages have more similarity. Hence, it is more recommendable that knowledge of two
different languages which are not similar is better than knowledge of two similar languages. In
the condition of knowing similar languages, the switching process is not used in actual and
therefore, the performance of bilinguals is somewhat similar to monolinguals. It was observed in
tests of cognitive tasks where, bilinguals outperformed the monolingual persons (Mackey &
Sachs, 2012). This showed that bilinguals are more able to predict the behaviour of persons. This
also proved that a person could express himself in some ways as their cognitive development is
more that helps him in presenting actions in different ways. As mentioned above, verbal tasks
were performed better by the monolinguals, contrary to it, the bilinguals' performance was better

in executive control. The executive control is primarily based on various resource and skills like
inhibition, switching and working memory. It is assumed for bilinguals that their mind contains
two different set of languages which are accessed as per the situations to give their response
(Bialystok & Feng, 2011).
Benefits of bilingualism
The Bilingualism refers to the ability to speak two languages which are a manifest advantage in
itself. It is advantageous in various ways as it gives the ability to speak with more number of
people. The bilingual ability of a person makes him smarter as well because they have a better
capacity of predicting the behaviour of persons by their false belief tasks and also an
improvement in their cognitive skills (Leyendecker & et.al., 2013). Some of the researchers
have found out that in the bilingual's brain, there exist the knowledge of two languages which
sometimes act as an interfering element even when the person is using only one language
(Bialystok & et.al., 2012). Thus, they use to act as a barrier and create an issue for them. But, on
the other hand, they are taken as a blessing as they are helpful in resolving conflicts occurring
internally which make the cognitive muscles stronger (Sagarra, & Abbuhl, 2013). Because of
this, bilinguals are often sharp in solving puzzles related to mental ability. Besides this, the
bilingual brain plays an important role in improving the executive function that helps in
improving the concentration. Therefore, the person becomes able to plan and manage better
along with solving different kinds of problems. He adopts the capability of working with more
concentration and becomes more focused towards the subject (Blankenship & et.al., 2015).
In the present study, the major focus will be on Bilingualism and its role in working
memory. For this, the languages preferred here is English and Arabic so that the focus can be
laid upon testing the advantages that a person may have due to the knowledge of these two
languages (Costa, 2010). Further, to carry out a study on this subject help of various methods is
also taken which can depict the right advantage and work of bilingualism.

RATIONALE OF THE STUDY
It is basically in context to the formulated aim of the present research work where the
investigator is at this moment required to ascertain some advantageous scope of learning for the
bilingual individuals as compared the monolinguistic people. It is also in accordance to find out
some actual impact of a bilinguals verbal performance as compared to the monolinguals (Levi,
2015). This particular intent of the study is referred to be an essential context of the surveyor
where it has been found that a bilingual is more benefited by a monolingual with the fastest sense
of learning. It is also in accordance to sustain in today's diversified culture that duly necessitates
the individuals to have prior knowledge and exposure to those multi-cultural perspectives (Loe,
& Feldman, 2016).
In correspondence to which, they are at this moment benefited with an additive context of
learning with a faster pace of acquiring a newer set of things as well as languages. The present
study has thereby focussed upon a test attempt to evidently verify a cognitive advantage to the
bilingual individuals as compared to the monolinguals or bilinguals who knows more than two
different languages. Concerning which, it has been at this moment found as a dependent factor
that together outlook the age effect of the individuals. As a result to which, both bilingual and
monolingual contestants will at this moment refer to complete a prior set of inhibition and verbal
tasks with some major source of hypothetical propositions in the enlightened literature (Bloch,
2013). In accordance to which, the monolinguals are at this moment believed to exceed the
bilinguals in the spoken tasks.
However, the English- Arabic/ Arabic bilinguals are at this moment evident to showcase four
possible resultants with a foremost drawback in comparison to the participated monolinguals
than the average set of bilinguals. It is basically due to a higher rate of interruption. However, the
average set of bilinguals is likely to experience a lesser range of non-favoured outcome due to a
nonfactual switching where they can either perform as an average bilingual or opting to practice
as a monolingual as well. It thus showcases no such unfavourable outcome of results where on
referring to the status of age, it has together foreseen that the young participants are more likely
to perform as compared to another set of old age participants (Archila-Suerte & et.al., 2013).

It is in contradiction to yet another phase of this activity in context to the task of inhibition
where the bilinguals are believed to outperform the monolinguals where it is a non-verbal
activity. This stage is together referred to have a four distinct set of prospects where the English-
Arabic/ Arabic bilinguals are hereby referred to have more advantage as compared to another set
of average bilinguals and monolinguals where they possess an expertise outlook in switching
from one language to another (Casaponsa, Carreiras & Duñabeitia, 2014). It is with an equivalent
consideration of their age factors where the young participants are yet again evident to perform
in a more viable manner as compared to another set of old age participants.
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
Participants
The participants for the current study will be taken by the demography. For this, people who are
taken as a sample for the study consists of total 30 participants that have the knowledge of
English and Arabic language along with some monolinguals in the same category. Besides this,
the participants belong to different age groups of which half are under the age of 25- 50 years of
age group and the remaining of other half belong to age group of more than 50 years. Besides
this, to ensure that the results obtained have the consistency, it is taken care that all people have
similar educational background with the postgraduate degree in any discipline (Humphries, &
et.al., 2014). Further, they should have comparable social backgrounds and must have sound
physical and mental health with no disease related to vision as the tests will be based on pictorial
presentation.
Materials
To conduct the tests various materials and resources have been arranged among which, for
verbal performance participants will be tested through a picture naming task which is also known
as lexical decision task. For the accomplishment of a task, the Inhibitory control has been used in
which different tasks have been adopted which includes Stroop, Simon, Flanker and Antisaccade
tasks (Lauchlan, Parisi & Fadda, 2013). Apart from this, the participants will be later on asked
for filling a questionnaire also which will be based on assessing the proficiency of language.
Methods Stroop task: The Stroop task is a kind of psychological tests in which the visionary and
mental test of a person are assessed. In the present scenario, the participants will be given
2

a pictorial presentation where they will be shown some particular digits or figures on
screen and participants will have to identify their correct number and write down it. For
instance, the digit of "5" will be shown for seven times on screen. The participants will
have to enter the right number of digit displayed on the screen on their pad (Mackey &
Sachs, 2012). Likewise, in another trial, they will be shown some symbol like "+" for
five times and they will have to feed the correct number for this as well. Simon-type task: This task is somewhat difficult as the reaction of participants will be
checked which should be compatible. For instance, the participants will be shown two
squares of different colours on screen. In this, if black square appears, the participant will
have to press the left arrow while if green circle appears then they will have to press the
right one. For testing the participants more deeply, the shape can be shown in different
directions so as to check their ability to observe it and react in a compatible manner
(Bialystok & Feng, 2011).
 Flanker Task: For this task, the participants will see some series on the screen in which
various letters of English alphabet will be presented. For the accomplishment of a task,
participants will have to press the left arrow when in series of letters the middle one
alphabet is a consonant like B, C, D, P, etc. Contrary to it, they will be pressing the right
arrow when the screen displays any vowel in the middle series like A, E, I, O and U. This
can create many confusions among participants and they should have a good vision and
concentration (Sagarra & Abbuhl, 2013).
 Antisaccade task: For this task, the participants have to go through a presentation which
will continue for a limited period after this, the task will be divided into three blocks
which will be of prosaccade trial, antisaccade trial and mixed trial. Here, for the first
block, the participants will be shown a dot (.) which will further indicate that following
green plus will appear on the same side of the screen as the target stimulus. The stimulus
will be shown for 300 milliseconds only after which will be pointing to different
directions like right, left, upwards or downwards. After this, the participant will have to
hit the button as per the direction is shown by the stimulus (Costa, 2010). After
completing this, the participant will proceed for the next block of antisaccade task with a
similar process in different colour or shape. At last, the participants will move further
towards the third block of mixed trials, where they will be shown both the shapes and
3

figures simultaneously shown in prosaccade and antisaccade trials. Thereby, they will
have to identify the stimuli and its direction to react in a compatible direction.
4

REFERENCES
Journals and Books
Archila-Suerte, P., & et.al., (2013). The neural basis of non-native speech perception in bilingual
children.NeuroImage. 67, 51-63.
Bialystok, E., & Feng, X. (2011). Language proficiency and its implications for monolingual and
bilingual children. Language and literacy development in bilingual settings, 121-138.
Blankenship, T. L. & et.al., (2015). Working memory and recollection contribute to academic
achievement. Learning and individual differences. 43, 164-169.
Bloch, L. (2013). The relationship between socioeconomic status, bilingualism and working
memory in school beginners (Doctoral dissertation, School of Human and Community
Development, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg).
Casaponsa, A., Carreiras, M., & Duñabeitia, J. A. (2014). Discriminating languages in bilingual
contexts: the impact of orthographic markedness.
Costa, B. (2010). Mother tongue or non-native language? Learning from conversations with
bilingual/multilingual therapists about working with clients who do not share their native
language. Ethnicity and Inequalities in Health and Social Care. 3(1). 15-24.
Humphries, T., & et.al., (2014). Bilingualism: a pearl to overcome certain perils of cochlear
implants. Journal of medical speech-language pathology. 21(2). 107.
Knight, P., & Swanwick, R. (2013). Working with deaf children: Sign bilingual policy into
practice. Routledge.
Lauchlan, F., Parisi, M., & Fadda, R. (2013). Bilingualism in Sardinia and Scotland: Exploring
the cognitive benefits of speaking a ‘minority’language.International Journal of
Bilingualism. 17(1). 43-56.
Levi, S. V. (2015). Individual Differences in Learning Talker Categories: The Role of Working
Memory. Phonetica. 71(3). 201-226.
Leyendecker, B. & et.al., (2013). Learning a host Country: a plea to strengthen parents' roles and
to encourage Children's bilingual Development1. The challenges of diaspora migration–
Interdisciplinary perspectives on Israel and Germany, 289-304.
Loe, I. M., & Feldman, H. M. (2016). The Effect of Bilingual Exposure on Executive Function
Skills in Preterm and Full-Term Preschoolers. Journal of Developmental & Behavioral
Pediatrics. 37(7). 548-556.

Mackey, A., & Sachs, R. (2012). Older learners in SLA research: A first look at working
memory, feedback, and L2 development. Language Learning. 62(3). 704-740.
Sagarra, N., & Abbuhl, R. (2013). Optimising the Noticing of Recasts via Computer‐Delivered
Feedback: Evidence That Oral Input Enhancement and Working Memory Help Second
Language Learning. The Modern Language Journal. 97(1). 196-216.
Online
Bialystok, E. & et.al., 2012. Bilingualism: Consequences for Mind and Brain. [Online].
Available through: <https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3322418/>.
[Accessed on 5th January 2017].
6