Evidence for a bi(multi)lingual advantage on working memory performance in South African university students

Thesis (M.A (Social and Psychological Research))--University of the Witwatersrand, Faculty of Humanities, School of Human & Community Development, 2016Due to linguistic diversity within South Africa, multilingualism is becoming increasingly prominent. Since South Africa is host to 11 official languages, it is the norm rather than the exception that South Africans are exposed to more than one language. This has social, educational and cognitive implications. Specifically, research indicates that the acquisition of additional languages to an individual’s mother tongue has a positive effect on working memory – the short-term storage and manipulation of information during the performance of cognitive tasks – which may confer a ‘bi(multi)lingual advantage’ and could improve academic performance. Consequently, the aim of this study was to determine whether working memory ability differs significantly between students who are monolingual or multilingual, while statistically controlling for intellectual ability and socio-economic status between these groups. Participants were 78 undergraduate students, comprising English first- (monolingual, Mage = 20.06 years, SD = .88) and second- or additional-language (multilingual, Mage = 20.03 years, SD = 1.03) speakers, matched for age, gender and socio-economic status. Language groups were compared on the Automated Working Memory Assessment (Alloway, 2007) and subtests of the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale – Third Edition (Wechsler, 1997). One-way between-group ANCOVAs showed that (a) the multilingual group outperformed the monolingual group across five of six non-verbal subtests, namely Mazes Memory and Block Recall (non-verbal simple span), and Odd One Out, Mister X and Spatial Recall (non-verbal complex span), (b) the multilingual group outperformed the monolingual group on two verbal subtests, namely Digit Recall (verbal simple span) and Listening Recall (verbal complex span), (c) the language groups performed equivalently on verbal simple and complex tasks of Word Recall, Non-word Recall, Counting Recall and Backwards Digit Recall. The findings contribute to the extant literature confirming a ‘bi(multi)lingual advantage’ in executive functioning. Theoretical and practical implications are discussed in light of academic performance. Keywords: working memory, monolingualism, multilingualism, bi(multi)lingual advantage, South Afric

How Data Papers Present a Unique Contribution To Open Research In The Humanities And Social Sciences

The open research movement and initiatives like the FAIR principles have been critical in establishing the importance of data in research, particularly within the sciences. Alongside the sciences, attention to openly available data in Humanities and Social Sciences (HSS) research has gradually grown. This growth is largely attributed to the increased availability of digital collections, the development of new data-intensive methods, an increasingly solid infrastructure, increased pressure from funders, the requirement of data management plans for preservation purposes, and the involvement of research libraries in data curation. In this context, attention to how data is produced, how it is openly and transparently shared, and how it can be reused has generated great interest, accompanied by an inevitable need for reputable data sharing outlets. One such outlet is the data paper – a peer-reviewed publication that focuses on describing a curated dataset. Data papers can be shared in traditional research journals as one subtype of article publication, or, more recently, in data journals which are dedicated to the publication of data papers. This presentation focuses on the work done by the open access Journal of Open Humanities (JOHD) in promoting the practice of publishing data papers with their accompanying open access datasets. JOHD was established with Ubiquity Press in 2015 to promote awareness, use, and reuse of humanities data. JOHD data papers promote the comprehensive description of how a dataset was assembled, where it may be accessed, and any crucial context including the research questions that framed the data gathering, including limitations to the original methods or scope of sources included. JOHD data papers suggest potential future reuses of data, which recent analytics seem to suggest has helped increase the visibility of datasets, and therefore their research impact (Marongiu et al., forthcoming; McGillivray et al., 2022). In addition, an overview of the three key elements (the “golden triangle”) that assess the impact of open research efforts as represented by different research outputs (datasets, data papers and research papers) will be presented, along with proposed initiatives for linking these. In doing so, we aim to (a) find a programmatic way to identify these links by extracting information from available metadata of datasets and verifying their accuracy, and (b) create a “ground truth” in a manual and/or machine-assisted way which would enable the training of more sophisticated NLP-based methods as a next step. We hope to illustrate the importance of including data papers into the research conversation given that they present a unique contribution to addressing global challenges within the open research arena

Sociolinguistic context matters: Exploring differences in contextual linguistic diversity in South Africa and England

This work was supported by the Commonwealth Scholarship Commission and Cambridge Commonwealth, European & International Trust to Mandy Wigdorowitz, and MSCA-COFUND Athenea 3i-2018 grant (754446) to Ana I. Perez: [Grant Number 754446].Individual reports of language history, use, and proficiency are generally considered sufficient for language profiling. Yet, these variables alone neglect the contribution of contextual linguistic diversity to one’s overall language repertoire. In this study we used the Contextual Linguistic Profile Questionnaire to evaluate whether there is a difference in contextual linguistic diversity between participants across the linguistically dissimilar contexts of South Africa and England. We further assessed whether selfreported lingualism status groups (monolinguals, bilinguals, multilinguals) scored differently on contextual linguistic diversity to evaluate the utility and uniformity of categorical labels across varying contexts, and investigated how codeswitching and socio-economic status contributed to these effects. Our results demonstrated that contextual linguistic diversity differs between nations: South Africans score higher, promotion of multilingualism is dependent on socio-economic status only in England, lingualism status is not contextually comparable when measured categorically, and codeswitching accounts for linguistic features of South Africans.Commonwealth Scholarship Commission and Cambridge Commonwealth, European & International TrustMSCA-COFUND Athenea 3i-2018 grant 75444

The Case for Contextual Linguistic Diversity: Language Profiling, Multilingual Identity, and High-Level Listening Comprehension Ability in South African University Students

Global multilingualism is undoubtedly increasing, yet some contexts are linguistically more diverse than others purely as a result of the nature of linguistically diverse communities and, by proxy, passive linguistic exposure that individuals may experience by being immersed in the contextual milieu. How the sociolinguistic context of language use contributes to an individual's linguistic repertoire has yet to be fully conceptualised or quantitatively investigated within the language sciences. To meet this goal, I first explore this overlooked contextual linguistic feature through the development, validation, and application of a holistic language profiling measure, the Contextual Linguistic Profile Questionnaire (CLiP-Q). To this end, three research studies are presented. First, I develop and validate a psychometric tool, the Contextual and Individual Linguistic Diversity Questionnaire (CILD-Q as part of the larger CLiP-Q), which measures multilingual exposure and endorsement as pertaining to particular linguistic contexts. From an exploratory factor analysis with data from 353 participants (62.9% South African, 37.1% UK), a three-factor solution best describes the structure of the CILD-Q: Multilingualism in Context (contextual use and societal practice of multiple languages within a community), Multilingualism in Practice (direct and indirect linguistic exchanges and conversational interaction), Linguistic Diversity Promotion (societal and governmental endorsement of linguistic variation). The CILD-Q positively correlates with a metric of the social diversity of language use (language entropy) further evincing its convergent validity, and item scores corresponding to the three factors have sufficient reliability (α’s > .80). Second, I apply the CILD-Q to evaluate whether people who live in a multilingual context (South Africa) report greater contextual linguistic diversity than those from a predominantly unilingual context (England), as well as evaluate the role of language entropy, lingualism status (monolingualism, bilingualism, multilingualism), socio-economic status, and code-switching practice on this effect. Results demonstrate that contextual linguistic diversity differs between nations with South Africans scoring higher. The promotion of multilingualism is dependent on SES only in the England group, where England participants with higher SES score higher on Linguistic Diversity Promotion. Lingualism status is not contextually comparable when measured categorically, and code-switching accounts for linguistic features of South Africans. Finally, a positive relationship emerged between language entropy and contextual linguistic diversity, suggesting complementarity between measures that capture the social influence of language experience. Third is the application of the CLiP-Q to contextualise and appropriately categorise the language experience of South Africans completing tertiary education to investigate high-level text comprehension ability. The ability to draw inferences from auditory and written input is crucial for comprehension and successful educational outcomes, and is especially relevant in linguistically diverse contexts where learners have heterogeneous language backgrounds but are educated in the predominant language of the country. Such a case is South Africa, where tertiary education is almost exclusively received through the medium of English, though it is not the first language (L1) for the majority of citizens. Accordingly, the third study assesses the role of language experience (L1, multilingualism, and contextual linguistic diversity) and inhibitory control on high-level listening comprehension in undergraduate multilingual South Africans with advanced English proficiency. Results indicate that L1-English participants were more efficient and accurate at monitoring and revising their listening comprehension, while participants with higher contextual linguistic diversity were less efficient at monitoring and less accurate at revising the comprehension content. Furthermore, individual differences in inhibitory control were associated with differences in revision where participants with lower inhibitory control took longer to update the content and replace their initial interpretation for a new one. Participants’ L1 appears to supersede their advanced English proficiency on highly complex listening comprehension involving revision. In this dissertation, I demonstrate that the CLiP-Q is a holistic instrument with which to measure and quantify contextual linguistic diversity which, in turn, is relevant to a range of higher order linguistic skills essential for academic development.Commonwealth Scholarship Commission and Cambridge Commonwealth, European and International Trus

The case for Contextual Linguistic Diversity in bilingualism research

The language sciences have made concerted efforts to emphasise the impact of sociolinguistic context on shaping one’s language repertoire and associated (neuro)cognitive adaptations, largely propelled by WEIRD-centric research and perspectives. Active engagement with known languages is necessary for acquisition, but input from the ambient environment is typically not addressed or is considered noise. While it may be that irregular and transient linguistic information is indeed noise, there is a missing middle-ground pertaining to language knowledge that falls between explicit input and linguistic noise, primarily observed in highly linguistically diverse contexts. I consider this missing form of input by making a case for Contextual Linguistic Diversity, the view that one’s linguistic repertoire is not solely constituted by the active use of, or intentional engagement with languages but also by passive and regular exposure to ambient linguistic input. I offer a theoretical foundation and appeal to existing evidence supporting the view that passive exposure to multiple languages may systematically affect linguistic and (neuro)cognitive abilities, even in the absence of proficiency in or awareness of ambient languages. Adopting a holistic view of contextually influenced linguistic experiences is essential to fairly representing all individuals in their respective sociolinguistic contexts and consequently advancing the field

What does open research mean for Anthropology?

This presentation is about the broader landscape of open research and how data and its distribution have been considered in this space. It provides information about what data can include, how it can be appropriately shared and effectively rewarded, and the challenges that have limited the widespread adoption of data sharing

Comparison of multilingual measures within and across diverse contexts: CLiP-Q, SECSE, and language entropy

Language context is a factor thought to shape linguistic and cognitive control systems. The Adaptive Control Hypothesis predicts that cognitive control differs across language contexts and long-term differences in cognitive control may be observed based on language experience. However, there is a need for consensus regarding the methods used to capture language experience. We compare three methods originally characterized in different populations to measure different aspects of language experience. The Contextual Linguistic Profile Questionnaire (CLiP-Q) measures linguistic diversity at the individual and contextual level; the Survey of Code-Switching Experience (SECSE) measures contextual exposure and mixing practices; and language entropy measures the social diversity of language use. In addition to quantitative and qualitative comparison of these methods in the same population (N = 296 ), we aim to extend the ecological validity of each methodology by comparing linguistic diversity, habits, and cognitive performance across linguistically diverse environments: unilingual, bilingual, and multilingual communities

High-level listening comprehension in advanced English as a second language: Effects of the first language and inhibitory control

English is imposed as the language of instruction in multiple linguistically diverse societies where there is more than one official language. This might have negative educational conse quences for people whose first language (L1) is not English. To investigate this, 47 South Africans with advanced English proficiency but different L1s (L1-English vs. L1-Zulu) were evaluated in their listening comprehension ability. Specifically, participants listened to narra tive texts in English which prompted an initial inference followed by a sentence containing an expected inference or an unexpected but plausible concept, assessing comprehension monitor ing. A final question containing congruent or incongruent information in relation to the text information followed, assessing the revision process. L1-English participants were more efficient at monitoring and revising their listening comprehension. Furthermore, individual differences in inhibitory control were associated with differences in revision. Results show that participants’ L1 appears to supersede their advanced English proficiency on highly complex listening comprehensionCommonwealth Scholarship Commission and Cambridge Commonwealth, European & International TrustMSCA-COFUND Athenea 75444

Deep Impact: A Study on the Impact of Data Papers and Datasets in the Humanities and Social Sciences

The humanities and social sciences (HSS) have recently witnessed an exponential growth in data-driven research. In response, attention has been afforded to datasets and accompanying data papers as outputs of the research and dissemination ecosystem. In 2015, two data journals dedicated to HSS disciplines appeared in this landscape: Journal of Open Humanities Data (JOHD) and Research Data Journal for the Humanities and Social Sciences (RDJ). In this paper, we analyse the state of the art in the landscape of data journals in HSS using JOHD and RDJ as exemplars by measuring performance and the deep impact of data-driven projects, including metrics (citation count; Altmetrics, views, downloads, tweets) of data papers in relation to associated research papers and the reuse of associated datasets. Our findings indicate: that data papers are published following the deposit of datasets in a repository and usually following research articles; that data papers have a positive impact on both the metrics of research papers associated with them and on data reuse; and that Twitter hashtags targeted at specific research campaigns can lead to increases in data papers’ views and downloads. HSS data papers improve the visibility of datasets they describe, support accompanying research articles, and add to transparency and the open research agenda

Deep Impact: A Study on the Impact of Data Papers and Datasets in the Humanities and Social Sciences

The humanities and social sciences (HSS) have recently witnessed an exponential growth in data-driven research. In response, attention has been afforded to datasets and accompanying data papers as outputs of the research and dissemination ecosystem. In 2015, two data journals dedicated to HSS disciplines appeared in this landscape: Journal of Open Humanities Data (JOHD) and Research Data Journal for the Humanities and Social Sciences (RDJ). In this paper, we analyse the state of the art in the landscape of data journals in HSS using JOHD and RDJ as exemplars by measuring performance and the deep impact of data-driven projects, including metrics (citation count; Altmetrics, views, downloads, tweets) of data papers in relation to associated research papers and the reuse of associated datasets. Our findings indicate: that data papers are published following the deposit of datasets in a repository and usually following research articles; that data papers have a positive impact on both the metrics of research papers associated with them and on data reuse; and that Twitter hashtags targeted at specific research campaigns can lead to increases in data papers’ views and downloads. HSS data papers improve the visibility of datasets they describe, support accompanying research articles, and add to transparency and the open research agenda