Publications

Displaying 1 - 5 of 5
  • Mooijman, S., Schoonen, R., Roelofs, A., & Ruiter, M. B. (2024). Benefits of free language choice in bilingual individuals with aphasia. Aphasiology, 38(11), 1793-1831. doi:10.1080/02687038.2024.2326239.

    Abstract

    Background

    Forced switching between languages poses demands on control abilities, which may be difficult to meet for bilinguals with aphasia. Freely choosing languages has been shown to increase naming efficiency in healthy bilinguals, and lexical accessibility was found to be a predictor for language choice. The overlap between bilingual language switching and other types of switching is yet unclear.

    Aims

    This study aimed to examine the benefits of free language choice for bilinguals with aphasia and to investigate the overlap of between- and within-language switching abilities.

    Methods & Procedures

    Seventeen bilinguals with aphasia completed a questionnaire and four web-based picture naming tasks: single-language naming in the first and second language separately; voluntary switching between languages; cued and predictable switching between languages; cued and predictable switching between phrase types in the first language. Accuracy and naming latencies were analysed using (generalised) linear mixed-effects models.

    Outcomes & Results

    The results showed higher accuracy and faster naming for the voluntary switching condition compared to single-language naming and cued switching. Both voluntary and cued language switching yielded switch costs, and voluntary switch costs were larger. Ease of lexical access was a reliable predictor for voluntary language choice. We obtained no statistical evidence for differences or associations between switch costs in between- and within-language switching.

    Conclusions

    Several results point to benefits of voluntary language switching for bilinguals with aphasia. Freely mixing languages improved naming accuracy and speed, and ease of lexical access affected language choice. There was no statistical evidence for overlap of between- and within-language switching abilities. This study highlights the benefits of free language choice for bilinguals with aphasia.
  • Mooijman, S., Schoonen, R., Ruiter, M. B., & Roelofs, A. (2024). Voluntary and cued language switching in late bilingual speakers. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 27(4), 610-627. doi:10.1017/S1366728923000755.

    Abstract

    Previous research examining the factors that determine language choice and voluntary switching mainly involved early bilinguals. Here, using picture naming, we investigated language choice and switching in late Dutch–English bilinguals. We found that naming was overall slower in cued than in voluntary switching, but switch costs occurred in both types of switching. The magnitude of switch costs differed depending on the task and language, and was moderated by L2 proficiency. Self-rated rather than objectively assessed proficiency predicted voluntary switching and ease of lexical access was associated with language choice. Between-language and within-language switch costs were not correlated. These results highlight self-rated proficiency as a reliable predictor of voluntary switching, with language modulating switch costs. As in early bilinguals, ease of lexical access was related to word-level language choice of late bilinguals.
  • Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 1-38. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99001776.

    Abstract

    Preparing words in speech production is normally a fast and accurate process. We generate them two or three per second in fluent conversation; and overtly naming a clear picture of an object can easily be initiated within 600 msec after picture onset. The underlying process, however, is exceedingly complex. The theory reviewed in this target article analyzes this process as staged and feedforward. After a first stage of conceptual preparation, word generation proceeds through lexical selection, morphological and phonological encoding, phonetic encoding, and articulation itself. In addition, the speaker exerts some degree of output control, by monitoring of self-produced internal and overt speech. The core of the theory, ranging from lexical selection to the initiation of phonetic encoding, is captured in a computational model, called WEAVER + +. Both the theory and the computational model have been developed in interaction with reaction time experiments, particularly in picture naming or related word production paradigms, with the aim of accounting. for the real-time processing in normal word production. A comprehensive review of theory, model, and experiments is presented. The model can handle some of the main observations in the domain of speech errors (the major empirical domain for most other theories of lexical access), and the theory opens new ways of approaching the cerebral organization of speech production by way of high-temporal-resolution imaging.
  • Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). Multiple perspectives on lexical access [authors' response ]. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 22, 61-72. doi:10.1017/S0140525X99451775.
  • Roelofs, A., Meyer, A. S., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1996). Interaction between semantic and orthographic factors in conceptually driven naming: Comment on Starreveld and La Heij (1995). Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 22, 246-251.

    Abstract

    P. A. Starreveld and W. La Heij (1995) tested the seriality view of lexical access in speech production, according to which lexical selection and the encoding of a word's form proceed in serial order without feedback. In 2 experiments, they looked at the combined effect of semantic and orthographic relatedness of written distracter words in tasks that required conceptually driven naming. They found an interaction between semantic relatedness and orthographic relatedness and argued that the observed interaction refutes the seriality view of lexical access. In this comment, the authors argue that Starreveld and La Heij's rejection of serial access was based on an oversimplified conception of the seriality view and that interaction, rather than additivity, is predicted by existing conceptions of serial access.

Share this page