855 1486Goff Rachel 089779 111306075542

Information about 855 1486Goff Rachel 089779 111306075542

Published on January 24, 2008

Author: Veronica1

Source: authorstream.com

Content

The Effects of Cafeteria Noise Distraction on Generative Naming in Bilingual Speakers:  The Effects of Cafeteria Noise Distraction on Generative Naming in Bilingual Speakers Rachel A. Goff, Graduate Student Leonard L. LaPointe, Ph.D. Julie A.G. Stierwalt, Ph.D. Gary Heald, Ph.D. Kahneman, D. (1973). Attention and effort. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Florida State University Theoretic Grounding:  Theoretic Grounding This study is grounded in two approaches Capacity theory of divided attention (Kahneman, 1974) Theories of bilingualism and language processing (Caramazza & Brones, 1979; de Bot, 1992; Tzelgov, Henik, & Leiser, 1990) Why is this Important?:  Why is this Important? Speed and accuracy of information processing is critical for academic pursuits, business, and most other daily tasks Attention provides management of information processing In our daily lives we observe the negative effects of auditory distractions on task performance in many settings, such as restaurants, libraries, and cars The concept of irrelevant noise affecting lexical processing in bilinguals is relatively unstudied. Rationale: Interference, Competition, and Distraction Affects Us in Many Ways:  Rationale: Interference, Competition, and Distraction Affects Us in Many Ways More errors and slower speed on cognitive and linguistic tasks Difficulty managing two languages greatly affected by divided attention Very little research on distraction effects on semantic fluency in bilingualism Purposes:  Purposes To determine the effects of auditory distraction on written lexical-semantic word generation in bilingual speakers To explore differential effects of distraction across languages in bilingual speakers (Spanish vs. English) Research Questions:  Research Questions Will cafeteria noise distraction have an effect on the number of lexical-semantic items generated in a fixed time frame? Will the number of words generated vary across languages with or without distraction? Hypotheses:  Hypotheses L1 (Spanish) will result in the generation of more words in a fixed time frame than will L2 (English) The condition of quiet will result in the generation of more words than during cafeteria noise distraction at 70dB No significant differences will be evident across semantic categories during conditions of quiet or cafeteria noise distraction Participants:  Participants The participants used in this study were 8 Spanish-English speaking bilingual students Participants ranged in age from 18 to 23 (M=20.3; SD=1.6) All had no reported history of neurological impairments Participants were students at Florida State University All participants had Spanish as their native language but were reported to be fluent in English Procedures:  Procedures All participants completed a detailed language history form (see Appendix A) Setting: An IAC double walled sound shielded audiometric suite Participants were administered a hearing screening to decide on the presentation level of auditory distraction (Appendix B) For semantic generative naming task: Write as many words in each category (sports, fruits, animals, vegetables) in one minute, first in one language, then in the other (English and Spanish) (Appendix C) Conditions: Either a quiet condition or a 70dB SL cafeteria noise condition Both languages and conditions were counterbalanced Data Analysis:  Data Analysis Participant semantic generative naming responses were recorded and tallied Measures of central tendency using descriptive statistics were determined for all responses across all conditions Nonparametric statistics (Wilcoxon Signed Ranks Tests) were used to determine differences in performance across conditions and languages Results:  Results Participants generated more words in English (M=24.6; SD=7.4) than Spanish (M=14.6 ; SD=5.0) with categories and conditions pooled (Z=2.31; p=0.021) The number of words generated across conditions (quiet vs. cafeteria noise distraction) failed to reach statistical significance with categories and languages pooled Number of words generated across semantic categories was relatively equal and no category differences were found Slide13:  Significantly more words were generated in English than in the native (L1) language (Spanish). This was unexpected. No differences in the number of words generated were found between quiet and cafeteria noise distraction Performance was relatively equal in number of words generated across semantic categories (sports, animals, vegetables, and fruits) More research is necessary to clarify the effects of distraction and interference on language skills in bilingual speakers Conclusions Interpretations:  Interpretations Perhaps more concentrated effort and focused attention was produced with the language perceived as being weaker. This is consistent with other research findings on cognitive resource allocation. Another plausible explanation may be that performance was influenced by immersion into a non-native language environment and into an academic environment that demanded L2 experience. Participants performed equally well in the two conditions. Perhaps our sample (young, college students) is impervious to or accustomed to auditory distraction. These subjects may not be representative of the population of bilingual speakers. They learned English early (preschool) and rated their English proficiency as equal to their proficiency in Spanish. It is possible that individuals with an intact nervous system can accommodate distraction. It would be of interest to further examine the effects of distraction with bilingual speakers who may have sustained neurological impairments (i.e. traumatic brain injury, progressive neurological disease, stroke). References:  References Agnes, M. & Guralnik, D. B. (2001). Webster’s fourth new world college dictionary. United States: IDG Books Worldwide, Inc. Awh, E., Jonides, J., Smith, E. E., Buxton, R. B., Frank, L. R., Love, T., Wong, E. C. & Gmeindl, L. (1999). Rehearsal in spatial working memory: Evidence from neuroimaging. Psychological Science, 10, 422-437. Barsalou, L. W. (1992). Cognitive Psychology: An overview for cognitive scientists: Tutorial essays in cognitive science. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Battig, W. F. & Montague, W. E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs, 80, 3. Caramazza, A. & Brones, I. (1979). Lexical access in bilinguals. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 13, 212-214. Cowan, N. (1995). Attention and memory: An integrated framework. New York: Oxford University Press. de Bot, K. (1992). A bilingual production model: Levelt’s “speaking” model adapted. Applied Linguistics, 13, 1-24. De Almeida, R. G. (1999). What do category-specific semantic deficits tell us about the representation of lexical concepts? Brain and Language, 68, 241-248. Erickson, R. J., Goldinger, S. D., & LaPointe, L. (1996). Auditory vigilance in aphasic individuals: Detecting nonlinguistic stimuli with full or divided attention. Brain and Cognition, 30, 244-253. Rodriguez-Fornells A., Rotte M., Heinze H. J., Nosselt T., & Munte T. F. (2002). Brain potential and functional MRI evidence for how to handle two languages with one brain. Nature, 415, 1026-1029. U.S. Department of Labor, Occupational Safety & Health Administration. (2005,February). Occupational noise exposure (1 paragraph). Occupational Health and Environment Control, 1910.95. Retrieved from: http://www.osha.gov/. Weber-Fox, C., & Neville, H. (1997). Maturational constraints on functional specializations for language processing: ERP and behavioral evidence in bilingual speakers. Journal of Cognitive NeuroScience, 8, 231-256. Zied, K., Phillipe, A., Karine, P., Valerie, H., Ghislaine, A., Arnaud, R., & Didier, L. (2004). Bilingualism and adult differences in inhibitory mechanisms : Evidence from a bilingual stroop task. Brain and Cognition, 54, 254-256. Slide16:  Appendix A: Degree of Bilingualism Form Appendix B: Setting Auditory Intensity:  Appendix B: Setting Auditory Intensity Subject # _________ Date:_____________ Gender: M F Age: ________ SRT: ________dB Played distraction at _______dB Appendix C: :  Appendix C: Semantic Generative Naming Task Form Examinee’s ID ______ Animals 1. __________________________ 11. _______________________ 2. __________________________ 12. _______________________ 3.__________________________ 13. ______________________ 4.__________________________ 14. ______________________ 5.__________________________ 15. ______________________ 6.__________________________ 16. ______________________ 7.__________________________ 17. ______________________ 8.__________________________ 18. ______________________ 9.__________________________ 19. ______________________ 10.__________________________ 20. _____________________ # + = ____ x 2 = ____ # √ = ____ x 1 = ____ Raw Score ____ Vegetables 1.__________________________ 11. ________________________ 2.__________________________ 12. ________________________ 3.__________________________ 13. _______________________ 4.__________________________ 14. _______________________ 5.__________________________ 15. _______________________ 6.__________________________ 16. _______________________ 7.__________________________ 17. _______________________ 8.__________________________ 18. _______________________ 9.__________________________ 19. _______________________ 10.__________________________ 20. ______________________ # + = ____ x 2 = ____ # √ = ____ x 1 = ____ Raw Score ____ Sports 1. __________________________ 11. _______________________ 2. __________________________ 12. _______________________ 3.__________________________ 13. ______________________ 4.__________________________ 14. ______________________ 5.__________________________ 15. ______________________ 6.__________________________ 16. ______________________ 7.__________________________ 17. ______________________ 8.__________________________ 18. ______________________ 9.__________________________ 19. ______________________ 10.__________________________ 20. _____________________ # + = ____ x 2 = ____ # √ = ____ x 1 = ____ Raw Score ____ Fruits 1.__________________________ 11. ________________________ 2.__________________________ 12. ________________________ 3.__________________________ 13. _______________________ 4.__________________________ 14. _______________________ 5.__________________________ 15. _______________________ 6.__________________________ 16. _______________________ 7.__________________________ 17. _______________________ 8.__________________________ 18. _______________________ 9.__________________________ 19. _______________________ 10.__________________________ 20. ______________________ # + = ____ x 2 = ____ # √ = ____ x 1 = ____ Raw Score ____ Appendix D: Counterbalancing:  Appendix D: Counterbalancing

Related presentations


Other presentations created by Veronica1

497 Mobile Computing
04. 02. 2008
0 views

497 Mobile Computing

CATALOGO PERFUMES
10. 01. 2008
0 views

CATALOGO PERFUMES

salvage
10. 01. 2008
0 views

salvage

labcon2003
10. 01. 2008
0 views

labcon2003

summer05
10. 01. 2008
0 views

summer05

Goldman talk Chile2006
11. 01. 2008
0 views

Goldman talk Chile2006

ling lect 32
13. 01. 2008
0 views

ling lect 32

RocksUnderMicro tcm4 285395
14. 01. 2008
0 views

RocksUnderMicro tcm4 285395

Holi
14. 01. 2008
0 views

Holi

Care Premature Infant March02
15. 01. 2008
0 views

Care Premature Infant March02

TropicalRainforestMB
15. 01. 2008
0 views

TropicalRainforestMB

englishgrammarthemat rix
16. 01. 2008
0 views

englishgrammarthemat rix

koracin presentation
16. 01. 2008
0 views

koracin presentation

flood
16. 01. 2008
0 views

flood

2006 11 28 1
20. 01. 2008
0 views

2006 11 28 1

structured chaos
24. 01. 2008
0 views

structured chaos

PHYS125 lt5 ET
24. 01. 2008
0 views

PHYS125 lt5 ET

lad 005
05. 02. 2008
0 views

lad 005

1 Brief History of Neuroscience
05. 02. 2008
0 views

1 Brief History of Neuroscience

FTP arkivet6 liss
06. 02. 2008
0 views

FTP arkivet6 liss

voting4
09. 01. 2008
0 views

voting4

Chapter 1
28. 01. 2008
0 views

Chapter 1

AristotleEthics
28. 01. 2008
0 views

AristotleEthics

Ancient Greek Philosophy
29. 01. 2008
0 views

Ancient Greek Philosophy

02Eficiencia
30. 01. 2008
0 views

02Eficiencia

g poole pedagogies
31. 01. 2008
0 views

g poole pedagogies

art121 2000 East Greek
04. 02. 2008
0 views

art121 2000 East Greek

OralHealthGrade4
06. 02. 2008
0 views

OralHealthGrade4

ChiefLeschi web2
13. 02. 2008
0 views

ChiefLeschi web2

Intro to networking
14. 02. 2008
0 views

Intro to networking

Movie Genres and Stars
18. 02. 2008
0 views

Movie Genres and Stars

03Lect19TallBld
10. 01. 2008
0 views

03Lect19TallBld

valentinesday
22. 02. 2008
0 views

valentinesday

hypertensionCTU
25. 02. 2008
0 views

hypertensionCTU

dawid hepler slides
25. 02. 2008
0 views

dawid hepler slides

Medications for ADHD3
27. 02. 2008
0 views

Medications for ADHD3

epa 101 2007 dewey
03. 03. 2008
0 views

epa 101 2007 dewey

20010621e
26. 01. 2008
0 views

20010621e

BeSafeBeProudExpo07
07. 03. 2008
0 views

BeSafeBeProudExpo07

INTERSTATEHistoryfor SchoolsII
12. 03. 2008
0 views

INTERSTATEHistoryfor SchoolsII

13 Boylan GASIPmodeling
20. 02. 2008
0 views

13 Boylan GASIPmodeling

NEAD
14. 01. 2008
0 views

NEAD

20020928 ICFA HN
25. 03. 2008
0 views

20020928 ICFA HN

MODULE3D
19. 01. 2008
0 views

MODULE3D

Attracting Retail to Oakland
04. 02. 2008
0 views

Attracting Retail to Oakland

Tourism Trends of Philippines
28. 03. 2008
0 views

Tourism Trends of Philippines

medemerg
18. 01. 2008
0 views

medemerg

sf valentin
14. 02. 2008
0 views

sf valentin

111107 Angels Watching Over Me 2
11. 02. 2008
0 views

111107 Angels Watching Over Me 2

chuyw global culture text
19. 03. 2008
0 views

chuyw global culture text

internationaltransit ion
23. 01. 2008
0 views

internationaltransit ion

Loschen SuperBowlSurveillance 1
16. 04. 2008
0 views

Loschen SuperBowlSurveillance 1

smarter choices
05. 02. 2008
0 views

smarter choices

prezent Atameken eng
17. 01. 2008
0 views

prezent Atameken eng

bowmandicksonhandout 06
17. 01. 2008
0 views

bowmandicksonhandout 06

wrightteam
07. 02. 2008
0 views

wrightteam

OhioStateGreatMoves
11. 01. 2008
0 views

OhioStateGreatMoves

baker1
05. 03. 2008
0 views

baker1

career resources
24. 03. 2008
0 views

career resources

Sensonor SW4 intro
11. 01. 2008
0 views

Sensonor SW4 intro

Faith Filled Living
15. 01. 2008
0 views

Faith Filled Living

luiz ramos
23. 01. 2008
0 views

luiz ramos

KathyrnLaBarre
29. 01. 2008
0 views

KathyrnLaBarre

Lu SF Presentation
21. 03. 2008
0 views

Lu SF Presentation

Presentation Noguera
14. 01. 2008
0 views

Presentation Noguera