3.8 Article

Characteristic functional networks in high- versus low-proficiency second language speakers detected also during native language processing: An explorative EEG coherence study in 6 frequency bands

Journal

COGNITIVE BRAIN RESEARCH
Volume 25, Issue 2, Pages 566-578

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.cogbrainres.2005.08.010

Keywords

cortical efficiency; second language learning; bilingualism; language training; proficiency; EEG coherence; cortical network

Ask authors/readers for more resources

An EEG coherence study was performed with a twofold objective: first, to scrutinize the theoretical concept of cortical efficiency in connection with second language (L2) acquisition and, second, to detect cooperations between cortical areas in specific frequency bands indicative for highly proficient L2 processing. Two groups differing only in their level of L2 proficiency were contrasted during presentation of natural language videos in English (L2) and German (native language, L1), with explorative coherence analysis in 6 frequency bands (0.5-31.5 Hz). The coherence brain maps revealed more pronounced and widespread increases in coherences in the alpha 1-band (8-10 Hz) in low-proficiency than in the high-proficiency L2 speakers. Surprisingly, this difference was obtained also during L1 processing and corroborated for both languages by multivariate permutation tests. These tests revealed additional differences between the low- and the high-proficiency group also for coherences within the beta 1- (13-18 Hz) and the beta 2-band (18.5-31.5 Hz), again during L2 and L1 processing. Since the same group differences were observed during L1 and L2 processing, our high-proficiency group might have profited from a more generic advantage in language or text processing strategy. This strategic advantage was most evident at alpha 1 frequencies, possibly related to a specific way of processing internal mental states (top-down processing). (c) 2005 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

3.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available