Hostname: page-component-669899f699-cf6xr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-05-04T05:47:25.479Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

ERP neural correlates of the interpreter advantage in coordination for interpreting students

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  21 October 2024

Fei Zhong Open the ORCID record for Fei Zhong [Opens in a new window]  and
Yanping Dong Open the ORCID record for Yanping Dong [Opens in a new window]
Fei Zhong
Affiliation:
Faculty of International Studies, Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, Chengdu, China
Yanping Dong*
Affiliation:
School of International Studies, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou, China
*
Corresponding author: Yanping Dong; Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The task of interpreting requires managing multiple tasks simultaneously, but how this practice of multitasking may contribute to the nonverbal domain of executive functioning has been explored in only a few studies, and little is known about the Event-related Potentials (ERP) neural correlates of this potential advantage. To fill this gap, we conducted an ERP study asking consecutive interpreting students and bilingual controls to perform a psychological refractory period (PRP) dual-task, comprising an auditory (Task 1) and a visual (Task 2) discrimination task. They were performed separately or together, the performance differences between which, i.e., dual-task costs, served as indices of coordination. Smaller costs for interpreting students in either or both tasks are considered an interpreter advantage in coordination, and those confined to Task 2 further indicate an advantage in bottleneck switching. The latter was exactly observed in stimulus-locked lateralized readiness potential (LRP) onset latency, suggesting such an advantage was probably due to efficient switching from the response selection of one task to that of the other at the bottleneck stage of dual-task processing. Smaller dual-task costs of stimulus-locked LRP onset latency thus constitute the neural correlates of the interpreter advantage in coordination.

Keywords

Bottleneck switchingcoordination skilldual-taskinterpreter advantagelateralized readiness potential
Type
Original Article
Information
Applied Psycholinguistics , Volume 45 , Issue 5 , September 2024 , pp. 897 - 919
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2024. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Bates, D., Maechler, M., Bolker, B., & Walker, M. S. (2014). Package ‘mlmRev’. Examples from multilevel modelling software review.Google Scholar
Becker, M., Schubert, T., Strobach, T., Gallinat, J., & Kühn, S. (2016). Simultaneous interpreters vs. professional multilingual controls: group differences in cognitive control as well as brain structure and function. Neuroimage, 134, 250–260.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boudewyn, M. A., Luck, S. J., Farrens, J. L., & Kappenman, E. S. (2018). How many trials does it take to get a significant ERP effect? It depends. Psychophysiology, 55(6), e13049.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Coren, S., (1992). The left-hander syndrome: The causes and consequences of left-handedness. Free Press.Google Scholar
Department of Psychology, East China Normal University (1991). Combined Raven’s Test (CRT). East China Normal University Press.Google Scholar
Diamond, A. (2013). Executive functions. Annual Review of Psychology, 64, 135–168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dong, Y. (2023). The unique bilingual profile of translators and interpreters. In Derreira, A. & Schwieter, J. (Ed.), The Routledge handbook of translation, interpreting, and bilingualism (pp. 11–26). Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, Y., & Li, P. (2020). Attentional control in interpreting: a model of language control and processing control. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(4), 716–728.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dong, Y., & Liu, Y. (2016). Classes in translating and interpreting produce differential gains in switching and updating. Frontiers in Psychology, 7, 1297.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dong, Y., & Zhong, F. (2017). Interpreting experience enhances early attentional processing, conflict monitoring and interference suppression along the time course of processing. Neuropsychologia, 95, 193–203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dong, Y., & Zhong, F. (2019). The intense bilingual experience of interpreting and its neurocognitive consequences. In Schwieter, J. W., & Paradis, M. (Eds), The handbook of the neuroscience of multilingualism(pp. 685–700). Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fischer, R., & Plessow, F. (2015). Efficient multitasking: parallel versus serial processing of multiple tasks. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1366.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
García, A.M., Muñoz, E. and Kogan, B. (2020). Taxing the bilingual mind: effects of simultaneous interpreting experience on verbal and executive mechanisms. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 23(4), 729–739.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ghiselli, S. (2022). Working memory tasks in interpreting studies: a meta-analysis. Translation, Cognition & Behavior, 5(1), 50–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gile, D. (1995/2009). Basic concepts and models for interpreter and translator training. John Benjamins Publishing Company.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gladwin, T. E., M’t Hart, B., & de Jong, R. (2008). Dissociations between motor-related EEG measures in a cued movement sequence task. Cortex, 44(5), 521–536.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Henrard, S., & Van Daele, A. (2017). Different bilingual experiences might modulate executive tasks advantages: comparative analysis between monolinguals, translators, and interpreters. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1870.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Huang, Y. X., & Luo, Y. J. (2006). Temporal course of emotional negativity bias: an ERP study. Neuroscience Letters, 398(1-2), 91–96.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keye, S. A., Kinder, C. J., Rosok, L. M., Cannavale, C. N., Walk, A., & Khan, N. A. (2024). Neuroelectric indices of pre-motor planning and adiposity are selectively related to balance in children. Human Movement Science, 95, 103216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kuznetsova, A., Brockhoff, P. B., & Christensen, R. H. B. (2017). lmerTest package: tests in linear mixed effects models. Journal of Statistical Software, 82(13).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lenth, R., Singmann, H., Love, J., Buerkner, P., & Herve, M. (2018). Emmeans: estimated marginal means. AKA Least-Squares Means, 1(7).Google Scholar
Li, P., Zhang, F., Tsai, E., & Puls, B. (2014). Language history questionnaire (LHQ 2.0): a new dynamic web-based research tool. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 17(3), 673–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, Y., Liu, M., Zhang, W., Huang, S., Zhang, B., Liu, X., & Chen, Q. (2017). Neurophysiological correlates of visual dominance: a lateralized readiness potential investigation. Frontiers in Psychology, 8 (March), 1–8.Google ScholarPubMed
Liepelt, R., Strobach, T., Frensch, P., & Schubert, T. (2011). Improved intertask coordination after extensive dual-task practice. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64(7), 1251–1272.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Luck, S. J. (2014). An introduction to the event-related potential technique. MIT press.Google Scholar
Mittelstädt, V., Mackenzie, I. G., Leuthold, H., & Miller, J. (2022). Electrophysiological evidence against parallel motor processing during multitasking. Psychophysiology, 59(1), e13951.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morales, J., Padilla, F., Gómez-Ariza, C. J., & Bajo, M. T. (2015). Simultaneous interpretation selectively influences working memory and attentional networks. Acta Psychologica, 155, 82–91.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, D. J., Agirrezabal, M., Brännström, J. K., & Gade, P. A. (2022). Lateralized Readiness Potentials Recorded with Near-Threshold Auditory Stimuli in Subjects Simulating Hearing Loss. Audiology and Neurotology, 27(2), 139–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Navon, D., & Miller, J. (2002). Queuing or sharing? A critical evaluation of the single-bottleneck notion. Cognitive Psychology, 44(3), 193–251.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osborne, K. J., Zhang, W., Farrens, J., Geiger, M., Kraus, B., Glazer, J., … & Mittal, V. A. (2022). Neural mechanisms of motor dysfunction in individuals at clinical high-risk for psychosis: evidence for impairments in motor activation. Journal of Psychopathology and Clinical Science, 131(4), 375.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Osman, A., & Moore, C. M. (1993). The locus of dual-task interference: psychological refractory effects on movement-related brain potentials. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 19(6), 1292.Google ScholarPubMed
Padilla, F., Bajo, M. T., & Macizo, P. (2005). Articulatory suppression in language interpretation: working memory capacity, dual tasking and word knowledge. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 8(03), 207–219.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pashler, H. (1994). Dual-task interference in simple tasks: data and theory. Psychological Bulletin, 116(2), 220.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schmitt, B. M., Münte, T. F., & Kutas, M. (2000). Electrophysiological estimates of the time course of semantic and phonological encoding during implicit picture naming. Psychophysiology, 37(4), 473–484.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strobach, T., Becker, M., Schubert, T., & Kühn, S. (2015). Better dual-task processing in simultaneous interpreters. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1590.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Strobach, T., Salminen, T., Karbach, J., & Schubert, T. (2014). Practice-related optimization and transfer of executive functions: a general review and a specific realization of their mechanisms in dual tasks. Psychological Research, 78(6), 836–851.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Syndicate, L.E. (2001). Quick Placement Test 2. Oxford University Press and University of Cambridge Local Examinations Syndicate, 1–15.Google Scholar
Ulrich, R., Fernández, S. R., Jentzsch, I., Rolke, B., Schröter, H., & Leuthold, H. (2006). Motor limitation in dual-task processing under ballistic movement conditions. Psychological Science, 17(9), 788–793.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ulrich, R., & Miller, J. (2008). Response grouping in the psychological refractory period (PRP) paradigm: models and contamination effects. Cognitive Psychology, 57(2), 75–121.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Unsworth, N., Heitz, R. P., Schrock, J. C., & Engle, R. W. (2005). An automated version of the operation span task. Behavior Research Methods, 37(3), 498–505.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wen, H., & Dong, Y. (2019). How does interpreting experience enhance working memory and short-term memory: a meta-analysis. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 31(8), 769–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yudes, C., Macizo, P., & Bajo, T. (2011). The influence of expertise in simultaneous interpreting on non-verbal executive processes. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 309.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Zhao, H. & Dong, Y. (2020). The early presence and developmental trend of interpreter advantages in cognitive flexibility: effects from task differences and L2 proficiency. Translation, Cognition and Behavior, 3(2), 241–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zordan, L., Sarlo, M., & Stablum, F. (2008). ERP components activated by the “GO!” and “WITHHOLD!” conflict in the random sustained attention to response task. Brain and Cognition, 66(1), 57–64.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed