Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Stroop effects in bilingual translation.

Natasha A Miller1, Judith F Kroll

  • 1Pennsylvania State University, University Park, USA.

Memory & Cognition
|August 20, 2002
PubMed
Summary
This summary is machine-generated.

Bilinguals translating words experienced interference when distractors matched meaning but not form. This suggests input language cues aid lexical selection in translation.

Related Experiment Videos

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Not just two languages: Using variation in language experience to understand how cognitive resources shape syntactic processing.

PloS one·2026
Same author

"Todes" and "Todxs", linguistic innovations or grammatical gender violations?

Cognition·2025
Same author

Cognitive control and language ability contribute to online reading comprehension: Implications for older adult bilinguals.

The international journal of bilingualism : cross-disciplinary, cross-linguistic studies of language behavior·2024
Same author

Translation ambiguity but not word class predicts translation performance.

Bilingualism (Cambridge, England)·2023
Same author

Do Cross-Language Script Differences Enable Bilinguals to Function Selectively When Speaking in One Language Alone?

Frontiers in communication·2022
Same author

Language immersion and language training: Two paths to enhanced language regulation and cognitive control.

Brain and language·2021
Same journal

Music enhances associative generalization: Evidence from a memory integration task.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Video, text, and memory: An emotional verbal overshadowing effect.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Limited protective effects of multilingualism against age-related cognitive decline.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Validation of illustrated texts: Can pictures raise awareness of inconsistencies?

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

4I remember (and forget) your happy smiling face: Directed forgetting of emotionally expressive faces of in-group and out-group members.

Memory & cognition·2026
Same journal

Identity in the spotlight: Matching faces without overlapping features.

Memory & cognition·2026
See all related articles

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Psycholinguistics
  • Bilingualism Research

Background:

  • Bilinguals constantly manage two languages, influencing cognitive processes.
  • Lexical selection is a key challenge in bilingual language production.
  • Previous studies show semantic distractors cause interference, while form distractors facilitate translation.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To investigate the impact of distractor words on translation performance in bilinguals.
  • To examine how distractor properties (meaning vs. form, input vs. production language) affect translation.
  • To refine models of language production and lexical selection in bilinguals.

Main Methods:

  • Two experiments involving English-Spanish bilinguals translating words.
  • Presentation of distractor words after target words at varying stimulus onset asynchronies (200ms, 500ms).
  • Distractors varied in language (input vs. production) and relation (semantic vs. form) to the target or translation.

Main Results:

  • Experiment 1: Semantic distractors in the production language caused Stroop-like interference; form distractors facilitated translation.
  • Experiment 2: Distractors in the input language showed only marginal effects on translation.
  • Translation performance is modulated by the language and type of distractor presented.

Conclusions:

  • Language cues related to input may reduce lexical competition during translation.
  • Findings challenge existing models of language production and language selection in bilinguals.
  • The locus of language selection is constrained by the interaction between input and output processes.