Conflict monitoring and resolution: Are two languages better than one? Evidence from reaction time and event-related brain potentials

Kousaie, Shanna; Phillips, Natalie A. · 2012 · OpenAlex-citations

DOI: 10.1016/j.brainres.2012.01.052

archive: archived pipeline: cataloged verified

Get this paper ↗ (DOI — opens at the source; we link to it, we don't host it)

Summary

This study investigates the "bilingual advantage" hypothesis, which posits that managing two languages enhances cognitive control processes such as conflict monitoring and resolution. While previous research using behavioral measures (reaction time and accuracy) has yielded inconsistent results regarding whether bilinguals outperform monolinguals on executive function tasks, neuroimaging studies suggest underlying neural differences even when behavior is similar. Kousaie and Phillips (2012) aimed to clarify this by examining both behavioral and electrophysiological responses in monolingual and highly proficient bilingual young adults. The researchers utilized three tasks sensitive to executive control: the Stroop task, the Simon task, and a modified Eriksen flanker task. Crucially, this study employed event-related potentials (ERPs) to measure neural correlates of conflict monitoring (N2 component), resource allocation and stimulus categorization (P3 component), and error processing (ERN component), providing high temporal resolution of cognitive processes. The experimental design involved 25 monolinguals and 26 bilinguals performing the three tasks while EEG data were recorded. Behavioral analysis revealed no significant differences between language groups in accuracy or reaction time for any of the tasks. Both groups exhibited the expected main effects of trial type, with slower responses and lower accuracy on incongruent trials compared to congruent or neutral trials, confirming that the tasks successfully engaged conflict resolution mechanisms. However, ERP analyses uncovered significant neural differences between the groups that were not reflected in behavior. These differences were task-specific and inconsistent. For the Stroop task, monolinguals showed larger N2 amplitudes (suggesting greater conflict monitoring effort) and later P3 latencies (indicating slower stimulus categorization) than bilinguals. In the Simon task, monolinguals exhibited larger P3 amplitudes. For the Eriksen flanker task, monolinguals showed longer P3 latency delays on incongruent trials compared to bilinguals, and distinct patterns in ERN amplitude, with bilinguals showing larger ERNs for incongruent trials. The findings indicate that while bilinguals and monolinguals perform similarly on standard executive control tasks, their underlying neural processing strategies differ. The observed ERP differences suggest that bilinguals may utilize more efficient neural mechanisms for conflict monitoring and resolution, requiring less neural effort or time to process conflicting information. However, because these neural differences did not translate into behavioral advantages, the authors conclude that the ERP variations may not represent a functional "advantage" in terms of performance speed or accuracy. Instead, the results highlight that bilingualism alters the neural implementation of cognitive control, potentially leading to different patterns of brain activation and timing during conflict resolution. This study underscores the importance of using electrophysiological measures to detect subtle cognitive differences that behavioral metrics alone may miss, contributing to the ongoing debate about the nature and consistency of the bilingual advantage.

Provenance

The full processing record for this entry. Every stage of this paper's journey through the pipeline is logged — what ran, with which tool and model, how many attempts it took, and when it last completed.

Summary generated by qwen3.6-27b-prismaquant on 2026-06-26; verification: verified.

Topics

Ranked by relevance to this paper. Hover a topic for its definition.

• dual task multitasking