Who said what to whom? Memory for sources and destinations in monolinguals and bilinguals.

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Naoko Tsuboi, Wendy S Francis
{"title":"Who said what to whom? Memory for sources and destinations in monolinguals and bilinguals.","authors":"Naoko Tsuboi, Wendy S Francis","doi":"10.3758/s13421-024-01589-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Two experiments with monolingual and bilingual participants tested memory for sources (speakers) and destinations (listeners) in conversations consisting of self-referential statements. In Experiment 1, participants directly interacted in English conversations with audio-visually recorded confederates. In Experiment 2, participants observed recorded conversations among confederates. In both conversational situations, source memory was more accurate than destination memory, indicating that the attentional resources consumed by self-focus or sentence production/completion do not explain why destinations are less well remembered than sources in direct-interaction conversations. Source and destination memory were positively associated with item memory at the participant level, indicating that stronger item encoding is associated with stronger encoding of contextual information. In the observed conversations, source and destination accuracy were negatively associated at the trial level, indicating that these features of the memory episode are not encoded independently, and there is a tradeoff in the encoding of these contextual features. Item memory did not differ for monolinguals and bilinguals and was positively associated with proficiency only in conversations with direct interaction. In the observational setting (but not the direct-interaction setting), source and destination memory were more accurate for bilinguals than monolinguals. This finding suggests that bilinguals allocate attention more efficiently than monolinguals when the cognitive demands of sentence production are eliminated. Proficiency in English was positively associated with memory for the appropriate conversational partner only when participants had to produce sentence frames and complete them with self-generated information, suggesting that language proficiency is beneficial when cognitive demands are high.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3758/s13421-024-01589-6","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Two experiments with monolingual and bilingual participants tested memory for sources (speakers) and destinations (listeners) in conversations consisting of self-referential statements. In Experiment 1, participants directly interacted in English conversations with audio-visually recorded confederates. In Experiment 2, participants observed recorded conversations among confederates. In both conversational situations, source memory was more accurate than destination memory, indicating that the attentional resources consumed by self-focus or sentence production/completion do not explain why destinations are less well remembered than sources in direct-interaction conversations. Source and destination memory were positively associated with item memory at the participant level, indicating that stronger item encoding is associated with stronger encoding of contextual information. In the observed conversations, source and destination accuracy were negatively associated at the trial level, indicating that these features of the memory episode are not encoded independently, and there is a tradeoff in the encoding of these contextual features. Item memory did not differ for monolinguals and bilinguals and was positively associated with proficiency only in conversations with direct interaction. In the observational setting (but not the direct-interaction setting), source and destination memory were more accurate for bilinguals than monolinguals. This finding suggests that bilinguals allocate attention more efficiently than monolinguals when the cognitive demands of sentence production are eliminated. Proficiency in English was positively associated with memory for the appropriate conversational partner only when participants had to produce sentence frames and complete them with self-generated information, suggesting that language proficiency is beneficial when cognitive demands are high.

Abstract Image

谁对谁说了什么?单语者和双语者对来源和目的地的记忆。
以单语和双语参与者为对象的两项实验测试了在由自我参照语句组成的对话中对来源(讲者)和目的地(听者)的记忆。在实验 1 中,参与者直接与录制了音像的对话者进行英语会话互动。在实验 2 中,受试者观察了对话者之间的对话录音。在这两种对话情境中,来源记忆都比目的地记忆更准确,这表明自我关注或句子制作/完成所消耗的注意力资源并不能解释为什么在直接互动对话中目的地记忆不如来源记忆。在参与者水平上,来源记忆和目的地记忆与项目记忆呈正相关,这表明更强的项目编码与更强的上下文信息编码相关。在观察到的对话中,来源和目的地的准确性在试验水平上呈负相关,这表明记忆情节的这些特征并不是独立编码的,在编码这些上下文特征时需要权衡利弊。单语者和双语者的项目记忆没有差异,只有在有直接互动的对话中,项目记忆才与熟练程度呈正相关。在观察环境中(而非直接互动环境中),双语者的来源记忆和目的地记忆比单语者更准确。这一结果表明,在排除造句的认知要求后,双语者比单语者更有效地分配注意力。只有当受试者必须造句并用自己生成的信息完成句子时,英语熟练程度才与对适当对话伙伴的记忆呈正相关,这表明当认知要求较高时,语言熟练程度是有益的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信