ArticleBrain sciences2025
Multivariate Decoding and Drift-Diffusion Modeling Reveal Adaptive Control in Trilingual Comprehension.
Article in Brain sciences, 2025. 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND/
objectivesThe Adaptive Control Hypothesis posits varying control demands across language contexts in production, but its role in comprehension is underexplored. We investigated if trilinguals, who manage three dual-language contexts (L1-L2, L2-L3, L1-L3), exhibit differential proactive and reactive control demands during comprehension across these contexts.
methodsThirty-six Uyghur-Chinese-English trilinguals completed an auditory word-picture matching task across three dual-language contexts during EEG recording. We employed behavioral analysis, drift-diffusion modeling, event-related potential (ERP) analysis, and multivariate pattern analysis (MVPA) to examine comprehension efficiency, evidence accumulation, and neural mechanisms. The design crossed context (L1-L2, L2-L3, L1-L3) with trial type (switch vs. repetition) and switching direction (to dominant vs. non-dominant language).
resultsDespite comparable behavioral performance, drift-diffusion modeling revealed distinct processing profiles across contexts, with the L1-L2 context showing the lowest comprehension efficiency due to slower evidence accumulation. In the L1-L3 context, comprehension-specific proactive control was indexed by a larger P300 and smaller N400 for L1-to-L3 switches. Notably, no reactive control (switch costs) was observed across any dual-language context. MVPA successfully classified contexts and switching directions, revealing distinct spatiotemporal neural patterns.
conclusionsTrilingual comprehension switching mechanisms differ from production. Reactive control is not essential, while proactive control is context-dependent, emerging only in the high-conflict L1-L3 context. This proactive strategy involves allocating more bottom-up attention to the weaker L3, which, unlike in production, enhances rather than hinders overall efficiency.
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.