ArticleMemory & cognition2026
Differential adaptation of bilingual language control to cognitive load: Evidence from cued and voluntary switching.
Article in Memory & cognition, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Bilingual speakers must regulate cross-language competition to communicate effectively, yet this regulation typically unfolds under concurrent cognitive demands. To characterise how cognitive load shapes bilingual control, we used a dual-task picture-naming paradigm in which 78 proficient Chinese-English bilinguals performed single-language, cued-switching, and voluntary-switching blocks with and without a secondary tone-monitoring task. Cognitive load did not simply undermine performance; instead, it constrained control engagement and prompted context-sensitive reconfiguration. In cued switching, where the L2 is externally required and especially vulnerable to L1 interference, load shifted control towards a more proactive state that protected L2 access via global downregulation of the L1. In voluntary switching, where speakers can exploit trial-by-trial fluctuations in relative activation, load strengthened a reactive selection strategy: participants selected the L2 when it was rapidly accessible but fell back to the L1 when L2 activation was insufficient. Overall, bilingual control adapted to cognitive load by shifting both the mode and strategy of control in a context-dependent manner, showing that what adapts is not only the type of control recruited, but also how it is employed as contextual demands fluctuate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42681108What 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.