ArticleFrontiers in human neuroscience2022
Bilingualism and creativity across development: Evidence from divergent thinking and convergent thinking.
Article in Frontiers in human neuroscience, 2022. 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, 7 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction: Numerous studies have demonstrated the benefits of creativity from bilingualism. Divergent thinking and convergent thinking are considered the two most important components of creativity. Various (although not all) studies have concluded that bilingual children outperform monolingual children in divergent thinking, however, no study on children or adolescents so far has explored the relation between bilingualism and convergent thinking, or the brain structural basis of interaction between bilingualism and creativity. This study aimed to explore the impact of bilingualism on both convergent and divergent thinking in children and adolescents based on neuropsychological assessments, and the possible structural basis of the effect of bilingualism on creativity by a whole-brain analysis of regional gray matter volume (rGMV) and cortical thickness in children and adolescents. Methods: 92 healthy children and adolescents of age 4-18 were recruited from public or private schools in the French-speaking side of Switzerland. Demographic data of the participants were collected, including gender, age, pedagogy, usage of language, and parents' socioeconomic status. Most of the participants underwent the neuropsychological assessments of divergent thinking, convergent thinking, and fluid intelligence. Structural image data of 75 participants were analyzed. Both voxel-based morphometry (VBM) and surface-based morphometry (SBM) were processed, to perform the analyses of rGMV and cortical thickness respectively. Results: The outcomes indicated that convergent thinking, but not divergent thinking benefits from bilingualism in children and adolescents. However, this bilingual advantage appears to weaken across development. Unexpectedly, no significant correlation between morphometry and bilingualism was found. Neither divergent thinking scores nor convergent thinking scores showed any significant correlation with rGMV. However, the whole brain SBM showed that the cortical thickness in the right supplementary motor area (SMA) was negatively correlated with convergent thinking scores, which suggested that the children and adolescents with higher convergent thinking abilities may have thinner, more mature, and more activated cortex in the right SMA. Discussion: Bilingualism and cortical thinness in the right SMA might facilitate convergent thinking independently, by enhancing this selective ability.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.