Monolinguals outperform bilinguals in language but not executive function in aging and cognitive impairment.

IF 2.6 3区 心理学 Q3 NEUROSCIENCES
Neuropsychology Pub Date : 2025-07-03 DOI:10.1037/neu0001028
Stefanie Gard, Joseph Saad, Christine L Sheppard, Vanessa Taler
{"title":"Monolinguals outperform bilinguals in language but not executive function in aging and cognitive impairment.","authors":"Stefanie Gard, Joseph Saad, Christine L Sheppard, Vanessa Taler","doi":"10.1037/neu0001028","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>People with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) self-report declining cognitive function, although objective cognitive performance remains normal. SCD is a risk factor for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Previous research has found differences in cognitive performance in bilinguals compared with monolinguals. We examined cognitive performance in older adults with and without SCD, and the association between bilingualism and cognitive performance in cognitively healthy older adults, people with SCD, and people with MCI, and the influence of bilingualism on the age of MCI diagnosis.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Adults aged 65+ (<i>n</i> = 264) rated their ability in French and English and self-perceived change in concentration and attention, memory, and word-finding. They then completed neuropsychological tests assessing language, memory, and executive function. Participants were monolingual or bilingual and were older adults, reported amnestic or nonamnestic SCD, or had MCI.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>No differences in cognitive performance were observed between older adults and people with SCD, while people with MCI had lower performance on nearly all tasks. Monolinguals outperformed bilinguals in the Boston Naming Test, letter-number sequencing, California Verbal Learning Test, FAS, animal, vegetable/musical instrument, and A/F switch fluency tasks, but group performance did not differ on executive function tasks. Sensitivity analyses using English L1 bilinguals who completed the first administration of the language tasks in the English or bilingual version showed that monolinguals outperformed bilinguals on only the Boston Naming Test. Monolinguals had a later age of MCI diagnosis than bilinguals in our sample.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>These findings suggest that the protective effect of bilingualism reported elsewhere in the literature is not universal. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":19205,"journal":{"name":"Neuropsychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Neuropsychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/neu0001028","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NEUROSCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: People with subjective cognitive decline (SCD) self-report declining cognitive function, although objective cognitive performance remains normal. SCD is a risk factor for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and dementia. Previous research has found differences in cognitive performance in bilinguals compared with monolinguals. We examined cognitive performance in older adults with and without SCD, and the association between bilingualism and cognitive performance in cognitively healthy older adults, people with SCD, and people with MCI, and the influence of bilingualism on the age of MCI diagnosis.

Method: Adults aged 65+ (n = 264) rated their ability in French and English and self-perceived change in concentration and attention, memory, and word-finding. They then completed neuropsychological tests assessing language, memory, and executive function. Participants were monolingual or bilingual and were older adults, reported amnestic or nonamnestic SCD, or had MCI.

Results: No differences in cognitive performance were observed between older adults and people with SCD, while people with MCI had lower performance on nearly all tasks. Monolinguals outperformed bilinguals in the Boston Naming Test, letter-number sequencing, California Verbal Learning Test, FAS, animal, vegetable/musical instrument, and A/F switch fluency tasks, but group performance did not differ on executive function tasks. Sensitivity analyses using English L1 bilinguals who completed the first administration of the language tasks in the English or bilingual version showed that monolinguals outperformed bilinguals on only the Boston Naming Test. Monolinguals had a later age of MCI diagnosis than bilinguals in our sample.

Conclusions: These findings suggest that the protective effect of bilingualism reported elsewhere in the literature is not universal. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

单语者在语言方面优于双语者,但在衰老和认知障碍方面的执行功能优于双语者。
目的:主观认知衰退(SCD)患者自我报告认知功能下降,尽管客观认知表现保持正常。SCD是轻度认知障碍(MCI)和痴呆的危险因素。先前的研究发现,与单语者相比,双语者的认知表现存在差异。我们研究了患有和不患有SCD的老年人的认知表现,以及认知健康的老年人、SCD患者和MCI患者的双语与认知表现之间的关系,以及双语对MCI诊断年龄的影响。方法:65岁以上的成年人(n = 264)对他们的法语和英语能力进行了评分,并对注意力、记忆力和单词查找能力的自我感知变化进行了评分。然后,他们完成了评估语言、记忆和执行功能的神经心理学测试。参与者是单语或双语者,是老年人,报告有健忘性或非健忘性SCD,或患有轻度认知障碍。结果:老年人和SCD患者在认知表现上没有差异,而MCI患者在几乎所有任务上的表现都较低。单语者在波士顿命名测试、字母数字排序、加利福尼亚语言学习测试、FAS、动物、植物/乐器和A/F开关流畅性任务上的表现优于双语者,但在执行功能任务上的小组表现没有差异。使用英语L1双语者完成英语或双语版本语言任务的敏感性分析表明,单语者仅在波士顿命名测试中表现优于双语者。在我们的样本中,单语者的MCI诊断年龄比双语者晚。结论:这些发现表明,文献中其他地方报道的双语保护作用并不普遍。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA,版权所有)。
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
Neuropsychology
Neuropsychology 医学-神经科学
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
4.20%
发文量
132
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Neuropsychology publishes original, empirical research; systematic reviews and meta-analyses; and theoretical articles on the relation between brain and human cognitive, emotional, and behavioral function.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信