Judgments of learning in bilinguals: Does studying in a L2 hinder learning monitoring?

Nowadays, use of a second language (L2) has taken a central role in daily activities. There are numerous contexts in which people have to process information, acquire new knowledge, or make decisions via a second language. For example, in academia and higher education, English is commonly used as the language of instruction and communication even though English might not be students' native or first language (L1) and they might not be proficient in it. Such students may face different challenges when studying and learning in L2 relative to contexts in which they study and learn in their L1, and this may affect their metamemory strategies. However, little is yet known about whether metamemory processes undergo significant changes when learning is carried out in L2. The aim of the present study was to investigate the possible consequences on learning derived from studying materials in L2 and, more specifically, to explore whether the interplay between monitoring and control (metamemory processes) changes as a function of the language involved. In three experiments, we explored whether font type (Experiment 1), concreteness (Experiment 2), and relatedness (Experiment 3) affected judgments of learning (JOLs) and memory performance in both L1 and L2. JOLs are considered the result of metacognitive strategies involved in the monitoring of learning and have been reported to vary with the difficulty of the material. The results of this study showed that people were able to monitor their learning in both L1 and L2, even though they judged L2 learning as more difficult than L1. Interestingly, self-perceived difficulty did not hinder learning, and people recognized L2 materials as well or better than L1 materials. We suggest that this might be an example of a desirable difficulty for memory.

ERP and Behavioural Correlates of Prospective Memory in Bilinguals during L1 and L2 Processing.

Language influences how we process information from multiple domains. Thus, working in first (L1) or second language (L2) can modulate bilinguals' performance on basic activities, such as visual search, decision-making, or reading. However, few studies have explored the role of L1 and L2 processing during an essential ability, such as Prospective Memory (PM). This type of memory allows us to set intentions to perform in the future (e.g., to attend an appointment). Thus, this is a novel study that allows us to explore the influence of bilingual language processing on certain cognitive abilities, which have not been deeply studied yet, such as the recall of future intentions. Thereby, this study aimed to explore the neural and behavioural correlates of bilinguals during L1 and L2 processing in a PM task where participants had to carry out an ongoing task while recovering a prospective intention given a PM cue. Importantly, the nature of the PM cue (focal or non-focal) varied the monitoring demands of the task. Behavioural and Event-Related Potential (ERP) results indicated greater engagement of monitoring processes in the PM task during L2 processing. Specifically, in L2, we found lower accuracy rates in the ongoing task and smaller amplitude differences between the focal and non-focal conditions in the P3b. Altogether, these findings suggest an impairment in prospective processing due to working in L2 contexts, supporting previous research on the impact of the bilingual experience over PM.

Prospective memory in bilinguals and monolinguals: ERP and behavioural correlates of prospective processing in bilinguals.

Prospective memory (PM) allows us to form intentions and execute them in the future. Successful retrieval of prospective intentions depends on adequate context monitoring and disengagement from the ongoing task. These processes are also central in predicting incoming language information and guiding language production in bilinguals. We investigated if different bilingual experiences (early/late bilinguals, monolinguals) modulate performance in PM tasks that varied in attentional requirements (focal vs. non-focal). Behavioural and event-related potential (ERP) results indicated that early bilinguals differed from late bilinguals and monolinguals in how they performed the prospective task. Specifically, they showed larger differences between the ongoing activity and the prospective task in the N300 and P3b components when performing the more difficult non-focal PM task, indicating that they engaged in monitoring/updating to adapt to the task's demands. These differences were not observed in late bilinguals and monolinguals, suggesting that prospective processing is dependent on the bilingual experience.