Numerous studies provide evidence for experience-based neuroplasticity, however the extent to which bilingualism as an experience contributes to changes in cognitive function remains controversial due to inconsistencies in the current literature. One main concern is the absence of clearly defined bilingual groups that control for experiences which confound data and may falsely attribute cognitive advantages in speakers of multiple languages to bilingualism. Furthermore, bilingualism studies often investigate the possibility of enhanced inhibitory control as a result of managing multiple languages while other cognitive functions such as working memory have not received the same attention despite other research reporting positive trends between foreign language learning outcomes and performance on working memory tasks. This study first aimed to define two distinct bilingual experiences: “heritage bilinguals” and “instructed bilinguals”. The study further investigated differences in working memory between bilingual groups. Finally, participants were tested on two cognitively-demanding language aptitude tasks to determine if different bilingual experiences could predict better performance. Working memory was assessed remotely through digit span, corsi block, and Eriksen Flanker tasks. Language aptitude was measured with a vocabulary inferencing task (LLAMA B) and a sound recognition task (LLAMA D). Instructed bilinguals had faster response times in both Flanker conditions as well as higher scores on both aptitude tasks. A moderate correlation existed between heritage bilinguals’ vocabulary inferencing scores and response times in both Flanker conditions, while a strong correlation was present for the instructed group. No relationship was observed between either aptitude component and the digit or corsi tasks. Findings suggest that bilingual experiences may differentially impact working memory and performance on cognitively demanding tasks, although further research is required. Results are discussed in consideration of experience-based factors (EBFs) relevant to each group as well as methodological challenges resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic.

1. Bilingualism and Working Memory
Experience as a predictor of foreign language aptitude
Marybeth Martin
University College London
2020 IDSP Competition
23rd July 2020
London

2. BACKGROUND
● Learning new skills (eg.
languages) changes brain
structure and function
(Pliatsikas, Moschopoulou & Saddy 2015)
● Bilingual Advantage
Debate Controversy-
Enhanced cognitive
abilities? (Schwieter 2019)
● Bilinguals poorly defined,
different experiences
confound data (Bialystok 2017)

3. RESEARCH
FRAMEWORK
RQ1
RQ2
Can different bilingual experiences
modulate phonological working
memory?
Do active instructed bilinguals
perform better on vocabulary
aptitude tasks?
Positivist primary
research
Quantitative and
experimental
Survey also
conducted to aid in
control of
confounding factors

4. DATA COLLECTION
HERITAGE BILINGUALS
Age 18-40 speaking a
family language. In
country of residence
before 5 years old.
SAMPLING
Voluntary, convenience.
20 participants per group.
Remote recruitment via
social media = location
independent sample.
INSTRUCTED BILINGUALS
Age 18-40 in final-year of
a language degree. In
country of residence
before 5 years old.
RECORDING METHODS
DC1: Psytoolkit- Working memory
tasks (RQ1)
DC2: LSBQ via Survey Monkey
(RQ1/RQ2)
DC3: online vocabulary aptitude
tests (RQ2)

5. DATA ANALYSIS
STATISTICS
● DA1: Group mean
comparison (t-
test) (DC1, DC3)
● DA2: Correlation
analysis (DC1,
DC3)
APPLICATION
● Instructed & heritage
group mean scores
compared for working
memory (WM) and
aptitude tasks
● Correlation analysis
between WM and aptitude

6. FINDINGS
INSTRUCTED BILINGUALS
● F1: Faster response
times on attention-
focused WM task
(RQ1, DA1)
● F2: Strong correlation
between these
response times and
vocabulary
inferencing aptitude
(RQ2, DA2)
IMPLICATIONS &
LIMITATIONS
● Supports “Bilingual
Advantage” debate
● Recommended adult
language education
as possible
intervention for
cognitive decline
● Difficulty controlling
confounding factors

7. REFERENCES
● Bialystok, E., 2017. The Bilingual Adaptation: How
Minds Accommodate Experience. Psychological
Bulletin, 143(3), pp.233–262.
● Christos Pliatsikas, Elisavet Moschopoulou & James
Douglas Saddy, 2015. The effects of bilingualism on
the white matter structure of the brain. Proceedings
of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(5),
pp.1334–1337.
● Schwieter, J.W., 2019. The Bilingual Advantage
Debate. In The Handbook of the Neuroscience of
Multilingualism. Chichester, UK: John Wiley & Sons,
Ltd, pp. 701–735.

8. FUNDING INTERVENTION
Potential for
language education
to slow cognitive
decline
MARKETABLE
Foreign languages
are highly marketable
in a globalized world.
HEALTHCARE COSTS
Delay in onset of
dementia symptoms for
bilinguals- reduced care
costs for ageing
populations.
ANTI-RACISM
Reduction of
language-based
racist rhetoric.