ArticleFrontiers in psychology2022
How does bilingual experience influence novel word learning? Evidence from comparing L1-L3 and L2-L3 cognate status.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The Impact of Bilingual Scaffolding on the Acquisition and Retention of Specialized Medical Terminology.Advances in medical education and practice · 2026Article
- Cross-linguistic phonological activation in Chinese- English-Korean trilinguals.Frontiers in psychology · 2026Article
- Improvement of English-Chinese bilingual learning by integrating semantic analysis and neural machine translation.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- A comparative study on the development of Chinese and English abilities of Chinese primary school students through two bilingual reading modes: human-AI robot interaction and paper books.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bilingual experience exerts a complex influence on novel word learning, including the direct effects of transferable prior knowledge and learning skill. However, the facilitation and interference mechanism of such influence has largely been tangled by the similarity of the previously learned word knowledge. The present study compared Chinese-English bilinguals' paired-associate learning of nonwords in logographic and alphabetic writing systems. The logographic nonwords resemble the form and meaning of L1 Chinese words in varying degrees, being cognates, false cognates, or non-cognates of Chinese. The alphabetic nonwords resemble the form and meaning of L2 English words, being cognates, false cognates, or non-cognates of English. The learning sequence of logographic and alphabetic words was cross-balanced. The learning results were measured in production and recognition tasks. As for learning the logographic nonwords, both the recognition and production results showed that cognates were learned significantly faster than the non-cognates, and the false cognates were also learned significantly faster than the non-cognates. This suggests stronger facilitation rather than interference from L1 on novel word learning. As for learning the alphabetic nonwords, both the recognition and production results revealed that cognates were learned significantly faster than the non-cognates, but false cognates showed no advantage over the non-cognates. This indicates that interference from L2 is stronger than that from L1. Taken together, the results provide new evidence for the dissociable facilitation and interference effects of bilingual experience. These results carry potential educational implications in that learning novel words depends on substantial bilingual experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.