↓ Skip to main content

Bilingualism and Cognitive Reserve: A Critical Overview and a Plea for Methodological Innovations

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (97th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
1 blog
twitter
61 X users
facebook
3 Facebook pages
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Readers on

mendeley
279 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bilingualism and Cognitive Reserve: A Critical Overview and a Plea for Methodological Innovations
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2015.00249
Pubmed ID
Authors

Noelia Calvo, Adolfo M. García, Laura Manoiloff, Agustín Ibáñez

Abstract

The decline of cognitive skills throughout healthy or pathological aging can be slowed down by experiences which foster cognitive reserve (CR). Recently, some studies on Alzheimer's disease have suggested that CR may be enhanced by life-long bilingualism. However, the evidence is inconsistent and largely based on retrospective approaches featuring several methodological weaknesses. Some studies demonstrated at least 4 years of delay in dementia symptoms, while others did not find such an effect. Moreover, various methodological aspects vary from study to study. The present paper addresses contradictory findings, identifies possible lurking variables, and outlines methodological alternatives thereof. First, we characterize possible confounding factors that may have influenced extant results. Our focus is on the criteria to establish bilingualism, differences in sample design, the instruments used to examine cognitive skills, and the role of variables known to modulate life-long cognition. Second, we propose that these limitations could be largely circumvented through experimental approaches. Proficiency in the non-native language can be successfully assessed by combining subjective and objective measures; confounding variables which have been distinctively associated with certain bilingual groups (e.g., alcoholism, sleep disorders) can be targeted through relevant instruments; and cognitive status might be better tapped via robust cognitive screenings and executive batteries. Moreover, future research should incorporate tasks yielding predictable patterns of contrastive performance between bilinguals and monolinguals. Crucially, these include instruments which reveal bilingual disadvantages in vocabulary, null effects in working memory, and advantages in inhibitory control and other executive functions. Finally, paradigms tapping proactive interference (which assess the disruptive effect of long-term memory on newly learned information) could also offer useful data, since this phenomenon seems to be better managed by bilinguals and it becomes conspicuous in early stages of dementia. Such considerations may shed light not just on the relationship between bilingualism and CR, but also on more general mechanisms of cognitive compensation.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 61 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 279 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 <1%
United States 1 <1%
Unknown 277 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 50 18%
Student > Ph. D. Student 40 14%
Student > Bachelor 33 12%
Researcher 28 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 16 6%
Other 42 15%
Unknown 70 25%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 84 30%
Neuroscience 30 11%
Linguistics 26 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 20 7%
Social Sciences 14 5%
Other 21 8%
Unknown 84 30%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 76. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 May 2023.
All research outputs
#572,666
of 25,738,558 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#120
of 5,561 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,955
of 403,586 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#2
of 70 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,738,558 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 5,561 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 403,586 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 70 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 97% of its contemporaries.