The emotional Stroop task and emotionality rating of ...

This article was downloaded by: [Heather Winskel] On: 12 December 2013, At: 15:09 Publisher: Routledge Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Psychology Publication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/pijp20

The emotional Stroop task and emotionality rating of negative and neutral words in late Thai–English bilinguals a

Heather Winskel a

Department of Psychology, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, Australia Published online: 28 May 2013.

To cite this article: Heather Winskel (2013) The emotional Stroop task and emotionality rating of negative and neutral words in late Thai–English bilinguals, International Journal of Psychology, 48:6, 1090-1098, DOI: 10.1080/00207594.2013.793800 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2013.793800

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the “Content”) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use of the Content. This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

International Journal of Psychology, 2013 Vol. 48, No. 6, 1090–1098, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207594.2013.793800

The emotional Stroop task and emotionality rating of negative and neutral words in late Thai – English bilinguals Heather Winskel Department of Psychology, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour, Australia

Downloaded by [Heather Winskel] at 15:09 12 December 2013

T

he current study investigated how emotions are represented in the lexicon of late Thai– English bilinguals and a comparison group of native English speakers. Two tasks were used. In the emotional Stroop task, which taps into an automatic early lexical level of processing, the bilingual participants did not display the same automatic level of activation in their second language (L2) as in their first language (L1). In the emotionality-rating task, which involves a later, more in-depth conscious level of processing than the preceding task, similar results were found in both languages spoken by the bilinguals. These findings are interpreted as indicating that late bilinguals do not automatically respond to the emotional arousal associated with the meanings of L2 words to the same extent as in the L1, and this is likely to be mediated by language proficiency and the context in which the language is learned. Keywords: Thai; Emotional Stroop; Emotionality-rating; Affect; Bilinguals; Lexicon. a pre´sente e´tude porte sur la fac on dont les e´motions sont repre´senteés dans le lexique de bilingues thaı¨-anglais tardifs et d’un groupe te´moin de langue maternelle anglaise. Deux taˆches ont e´te´ utiliseés. Dans la taˆche de Stroop e´motionnelle, qui fait appel a` un niveau de traitement lexical automatique prećoce, les participants bilingues n’affichent pas le meˆme niveau d’activation automatique dans leur langue seconde (L2) que dans leur langue maternelle (L1). Dans la taˆche d’e´valuation des reáctions e´motionnelles, qui implique un traitement acquis plus tardivement et plus en profondeur a` un niveau conscient, que la taˆche preće´dente, des re´sultats similaires ont e´te´ trouve´s dans les deux langues parleés par les personnes bilingues. Ces re´sultats sont interpre´te´s comme indiquant que les bilingues tardifs ne re´pondent pas automatiquement a` l’excitation e´motionnelle associeé a` la signification des mots L2 dans la meˆme mesure que pour la L1, et que cela est susceptible d’eˆtre de´pendant de la maıˆtrise de la langue et du contexte dans lequel la langue est apprise

L

l presente estudio investigo´ co´mo se representan las emociones en el le´xico de bilinguës tardıós en ingle´stailande´s y de un grupo de comparacioń de lengua materna inglesa. Se utilizaron dos tareas. En la tarea emocional Stroop, que atan˜e al nivel de procesamiento le´xico automa´tico temprano, los participantes bilinguës no mostraron el mismo nivel de activacioń automa´tica en su segunda lengua (L2) que en su primera lengua (L1). En la tarea de evaluacioń de emotividad, que implica un nivel de conciencia de procesamiento ma´s profundo y tardıó que la tarea anterior, se encontraron resultados similares en los dos idiomas hablados por los participantes bilinguës. Estos hallazgos se interpretan como indicativos de que los bilinguës tardıós no responden automa´ticamente en la misma medida a la excitacioń emocional asociada con los significados de las palabras de la L2 que para la L1, y es probable que esto este´ mediado por el nivel de dominio de la lengua y el contexto en el que el lenguaje se aprende.

E

Correspondence should be addressed to Heather Winskel, Psychology, Southern Cross University, Coffs Harbour Campus, Hogbin Drive, Coffs Harbour, NSW 2450, Australia. (E-mail: [email protected]). The author would like to thank Dr Sudaporn Luksaneeyanawin and Dr Wirote Aroonmanakun, Center for Research in Speech and Language Processing (CRSLP), Linguistics Department, Chulalongkorn University, Bangkok for use of the laboratory facilities. Also thanks to Mr Chalong Saengsirivijam and Ms Sophie Morgan for assisting with participant recruitment and data collection.

q 2013 International Union of Psychological Science


STROOP IN THAI– ENGLISH BILINGUALS

One key issue in the area of second language acquisition concerns how emotions are represented in the languages spoken by bilinguals. In general, it is assumed that the first language (L1) acquired is more emotional than the second (L2) or subsequent languages in bilinguals or multilinguals (Altarriba, 2008; Dewaele, 2004; Pavlenko, 2008). The L1 is learned in the context of growing up within the family and so is more closely associated with early basic emotions. In balanced early bilinguals, both the L1 and the L2 may be closely attuned to the emotional content of the lexicon associated with each language. In contrast, in late sequential bilinguals, the L2 is typically learned in the teenage years or in adulthood in the context of the school, university, or workplace. Consequently, “the same opportunities for affective linguistic conditioning” are not present in comparison with the L1 learning occurring in early childhood (Pavlenko, 2008, p. 156). Thus, from this perspective, the L2 comes to be associated with greater control and distance from emotions (Altarriba, 2008; Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002) and is considered to be less arousing than the L1 (for a recent review see Pavlenko, 2012). Altarriba and Santiago-Rivera (1994) propose that the dominant language of a bilingual contains more richly interconnected semantic associations than the second, weaker language, which is due to the different contexts in which the languages are learned. The revised hierarchical model, a developmental model (Kroll & Stewart, 1994), is consistent with this view as it considers the L1 lexical store to have stronger links with the conceptual store than the L2 lexical store. Hence, aspects of meaning associated with L1 words are activated faster and more reliably compared to L2 words. However, empirical evidence is somewhat contradictory as to which language is more emotional in bilinguals. Anooshian and Hertel (1994) found support for the first language having a privileged position. They asked equally proficient English – Spanish and Spanish – English bilinguals to first complete a rating task of emotion words and neutral words. This was followed by a surprise recall task. The authors found that more emotion words than neutral words were recalled when the words were presented in the L1 than in the L2. In contrast, Ayc ic eg˘i and Harris (2004), using a rating and recall task of a range of emotion words (positive, negative, and taboo) and neutral words with relatively late Turkish-English bilinguals, found contradictory results. Participants rated words for pleasantness– unpleasantness, then completed either a recall task or a recognition task. There was an advantage for the more unpleasant words in the L2 in comparison to the L1 in both the recall and recognition tasks. In the L1 only the taboo words showed an advantage and

1091

negative words were recalled more poorly than neutral words. In the L2 all emotion words except for the negative words showed an advantage. In a more recent study, Ayc ic eg˘i-Dinn and Caldwell-Harris (2009) examined emotion memory effects in late Turkish –English bilinguals living in Turkey, who had learned English as a foreign language. These participants completed an emotional-intensity rating task (that is, a deep-processing task) and a counting letter features task (that is, a shallow processing task on five categories of words: negative, neutral, positive, taboo words, and reprimands). They were then required to recall as many words as possible. The authors found that emotionmemory effects were similar (apart from reprimands) in the two languages. Negative words had no recall advantage over neutral words in both the shallow and deep processing tasks in both languages. Harris and colleagues (Harris, Ayc ic eg˘i, & Gleason, 2003; Harris, Gleason, & Ayc ic eg˘i, 2006), using the skin conductance response (SCR) as a physiological response measure, found that when a bilingual’s two languages were learned relatively early, that is, prior to seven years of age, the L1 and L2 displayed similar response patterns when valence decisions to emotion words were made. For latelearners of an L2, they found larger SCRs for reprimands in the L1 in comparison to the L2, but no difference for the other categories (taboo, negative, positive, neutral words). These results suggest that the emotional effect may vary depending on age of acquisition, such that when the languages are both learned in early childhood the size of the effect is similar, whereas when the L2 is learned relatively late the effect is larger in the L1 than the L2. This research suggests that at least in late and less proficient bilinguals, when engaged in the processing of sentences or more complex linguistic stimuli, differences between the L1 and L2 can be detected (Harris et al., 2006). These divergent research findings also point to methodological dimensions affecting the results. These dimensions involve the type of task administered and the linguistic stimuli selected, as well as the age of acquisition and the proficiency levels of the bilingual participants. In the emotional Stroop task, participants are presented with emotional and non-emotional words and are asked to respond to the colour of the word presented. In general, studies have found that participants have slower response times to negative emotion words (e.g., death, sadness) in comparison to neutral or positive words (e.g., table, happiness), which is known as the emotional Stroop effect. The emotional Stroop task appears to tap into an automatic early lexical level of processing. The semantic meaning of the negative words is accessed


1092

WINSKEL

with participants largely unaware of this occurrence, which interferes or slows down the naming of the colours (Williams, Mathews, & MacLeod, 1996). Given the plausible link between the emotional Stroop task and early lexical processing, this task provides us with a tool to assess selective attention to emotion-laden words in a bilingual’s lexicon (Altarriba, 2008; Eilola, Havelka, & Sharma, 2007; Sutton et al., 2007). Recently, two studies have used the emotional Stroop task to examine the effects of emotional words in bilingual participants. Sutton et al. (2007) examined the emotional Stroop effect in both languages used by early balanced Spanish– English bilinguals, whereas Eilola et al. (2007) examined the languages used by late Finnish –English bilinguals. Similar results were found for the two groups of bilinguals even though age of acquisition varied. Sutton et al. (2007) found that negative words produced significantly longer latencies in both the L1 and the L2 than neutral words. Similarly, Eilola et al. (2007) found that there was an emotional Stroop effect for negative emotion words in comparison to neutral words in both the L1 and the L2. However in both studies, an interaction effect was not found between language and word type. Hence, a similar emotional Stroop effect was found for the L1 and L2 in both early and late bilinguals. Based on these results, Eilola et al. (2007) have suggested that level of proficiency might be the key factor rather than age of acquisition in explaining these differential effects. Eilola and Havelka (2011) conducted an emotional Stroop task while monitoring skin conductance in Greek –English bilinguals and native English speakers studying at a British university when presented with neutral, positive, negative, and taboo words. When tested in English the two groups of participants showed identical patterns in behavioral response: in both groups there were significantly slower response times to negative and taboo words in comparison to neutral and positive words. However, there were significant differences in skin conductance measures between the two groups, with English speakers having significantly higher skin conductance responses to negative and taboo words in comparison to neutral and positive words. This effect was not observed among the bilingual participants. Thus, even though the behavioral response was similar, the skin conductance measures indicated that the level of arousal was greater in the native than in the nonnative speakers.

THE CURRENT STUDY In order to gain further insights into how emotion words are represented in the bilingual lexicon, the

emotional Stroop task and an emotionality-rating task were utilized here to examine lexical processing and access to L1 and L2 in late Thai – English bilinguals. These two tasks involve different levels of processing. The emotional Stroop task taps into an automatic early lexical level of processing, whereas the emotionality-rating task, where participants are required to determine whether words have a positive or a negative affect, involves a later, more in-depth conscious level of processing (Ayc ic eg˘i-Dinn & Caldwell-Harris, 2009; Harris et al., 2003; Sutton et al., 2007). As previous studies using the emotional Stroop task with both late (Eilola et al., 2007) and early bilinguals (Sutton et al., 2007) have found similar effects, that is, longer latencies for negative words in comparison to neutral words in both languages spoken, we can expect similar results for the Thai –English bilinguals. Alternatively, as research suggests that at least in late and less proficient bilinguals, differences between the L1 and L2 may be detected (Ayc ic eg˘i-Dinn & Caldwell-Harris, 2009; Harris et al., 2006). The reasoning is that L1 words are more likely to automatically activate the semantic system faster and more reliably than L2 words; this is particularly pertinent to the emotional Stroop task which involves an automatic early lexical level of processing. On this basis, we could expect greater interference of colournaming for L1 than L2 words. As a later, more indepth conscious level of processing is involved in the emotionality-rating task, we might expect differences in results to emerge between the two tasks (Ayc ic eg˘iDinn & Caldwell-Harris, 2009; Harris et al., 2003; Sutton et al., 2007). In order to examine whether language proficiency is a mediating factor in performance on the emotional Stroop task, English language (L1) ability was assessed in the Thai –English bilinguals. A group of native English speakers acted as a highly proficient comparison group. METHOD Materials Two different word types were used in both English and Thai: (1) negative emotion words (e.g., lonely) and negative emotional words (e.g., death) (2) neutral words (e.g., chair, building) (see Appendix). There were 20 negative emotional words and 20 neutral words. All these words were known to the participants. The English words were initially piloted for familiarity using a Likert scale with 10 additional Thai participants, and after testing with the participants in the current study. Seventeen of the negative emotion words and 10 of the neutral emotion words


1093

TABLE 1 Means (and standard deviations) of the word characteristics of the negative and neutrals words in English and in Thai (the mean ratings for all words were not available).


Negative words

Neutral words

English word characteristics Affective valence (pleasure rating) Word length Log word frequency HAL Orthographic neighborhood size Lexical decision RT Rapid naming responses RT

2.24 (0.55) 5.40 (1.43) 9.40 (1.20) 4.30 (5.84) 616.61 (65.26) 613.64 (47.37)

5.19 (0.34) 5.55 (1.83) 9.94 (1.12) 4.55 (5.12) 620.59 (46.35) 599.80 (32.29)

Thai word characteristics Word length Word frequency Rapid naming responses RT

5.65 (1.60) 40.65 (35.52) 531.69 (23.27)

5.50 (2.52) 52.10 (65.49) 537.71 (14.89)

were taken from the Affective Norms for English Words database (Bradley & Lang, 1999). The remaining words were not available in the database. Table 1 reports the mean word characteristics of the negative and neutral words in English and Thai. In English, the negative words were attributed a lower affective valence than the neutral words, t (38) ¼ 15.33, p , .001. The English selected words were also matched groupwise for word length, frequency, orthographic neighborhood size, lexical decision, and naming RTs using the English Lexicon Project (Balota et al., 2002), which provides normative data available online (http://elexicon. wustl.edu/default.asp). Word frequency measures used were obtained from the Hyperspace Analogue to Language (HAL) norms (Lund & Burgess, 1996). Because the HAL norms are not normally distributed, the log transform of this index was used. Orthographic neighborhood size can also influence word recognition speed. Words that have larger orthographic neighborhoods have been found to produce faster response latencies in a lexical decision task (Andrews, 1992). Rapid naming and lexical decision latencies were also matched, as they “provide a window into the processes involved in word recognition” (Larsen, Mercer, & Balota, 2006, p. 63); consequently, any lexical feature of the word that influences word recognition, such as frequency or length, also influences lexical decision and naming speed. The English negative and neutral words selected were comparable for word frequency (HAL), t(38)¼ 0.58, ns; word length, t((38) ¼ 0.19, ns; orthographic neighborhood size, t(38) ¼ 0.14, ns; mean reaction time for lexical decision, t(38) ¼ 1.69, ns; and mean rapid naming latencies, t(38) ¼ 1.07, ns. All words were translated from English to Thai by a native speaker. The Thai emotional and neutral words were comparable for word frequency, t(38) ¼ 0.83, ns; and word length, t(38) ¼ 0.08, ns. The Thai word frequencies were obtained from the Thai one million

word database (Luksaneeyanawin, 2004). Furthermore, the length of the English words did not differ significantly from that of Thai emotional words, t (38) ¼ 0.52, ns; and neutral words, t(38) ¼ 0.22, ns. Rapid naming latencies for the Thai words As there are no rapid naming latency norms for the Thai words utilized in the current study, rapid naming latencies were collected. Participants Fifty-seven students (30 women) from Chulalongkorn University in Thailand participated. They were Thai – English bilinguals whose L1 was Thai. They ranged in age from 18 to 21 years (M ¼ 20.20, SD ¼ 2.05). They were majoring in Languages. Procedure The experiment was presented on an Acer Travelmate 804LCi laptop. Item presentation and data collection was controlled using Experiment Builder software (SR Research, Canada). An ASIO voice key with a wide frequency response microphone attached was used to record the response and naming latencies in milliseconds. Participants were tested on the 40 Thai words used in the emotional Stroop task; 20 emotional and 20 neutral words. Each stimulus was presented on a laptop and shown twice in random order but not consecutively. The words appeared in a large font (size 20). Participants were asked to rapidly name each word as quickly as possible. Each trial started with the presentation of a fixation point for 1000 ms, followed by presentation of the target word, and then a blank screen was presented for 1000 ms. Each participant was given 10 practice trials followed by 80 experimental trials. All subjects were tested individually. Naming latencies

1094

WINSKEL

TABLE 2 Means (and standard deviations) of the emotionality-rating scores for the Thai and English negative and neutral words by the Thai–English bilinguals and for the English words by the English native speakers. Negative words Thai words rated by Thai–English bilinguals English words rated by Thai–English bilinguals English words rated by English monolinguals

Neutral words

6.08 (0.58)

3.54 (0.41)

6.10 (0.50)

3.67 (0.39)

6.16 (0.48)

3.58 (0.55)


were measured from the onset of the target to the participant’s vocal response. Results There was no significant difference in RTs for negative words in comparison with the neutral words, t(38) ¼ 0.97, ns. Emotional Stroop task Participants Fifty-four students (34 women) from Chulalongkorn University, who had not been included in the previous sample, participated in the study. They ranged in age from 18 to 25 years (M ¼ 20.90, SD ¼ 2.08). An index of English language proficiency of these Thai – English bilinguals (whose L1 was Thai) was obtained using the Word Comprehension Antonyms and Synonyms subtests of the Woodcock Reading Mastery Tests – Revised (WRMTR; Woodcock, 1998). The mean percentage correct was 60 (SD ¼ 14). These participants also completed a language background questionnaire. They were all majoring in Languages or Linguistics. The majority of them began to learn English at either kindergarten or primary school in a formal setting. The age at which they started learning English varied from four to 10 years, with an average age of seven years (SD ¼ 2.4), typically, when they started school. They had on average been learning English for 16 years (SD ¼ 3.2). Of the participants, 57% had been overseas either on holiday or on short exchange schemes. On this basis, they can be considered to be late or unbalanced bilinguals, who have predominantly learned English as a Foreign Language. Some of the participants began to learn English relatively early but it was in a formal rather than a naturalistic setting. A comparison group of 54 English native speakers (38 women) with ages ranging from 18 to 32 years (M ¼ 22.14, SD ¼ 4.29), who were studying under-

graduate psychology, were recruited from the University of Western Sydney. They were recruited on the basis that they declared themselves to be monolinguals and thus unable to speak or read another language than English. They had a mean percentage correct score of 80 (SD ¼ 9) on the Word Comprehension Antonyms and Synonyms subtests of the WRMTR. Procedure Participants were tested individually. Instructions appeared on the computer screen and were reinforced verbally by the experimenter. Participants were instructed to press the “m” key on the keyboard with the right index finger if the word appeared in blue, and the “c” key if the word appeared in green. The method adopted was based on Sutton et al. (2007). The participants were told to respond as quickly as possible to the colour of the word and to ignore its meaning. A fixation point appeared in the center of the screen where the word was going to appear at the beginning of each trial for 300 ms. The fixation point was then replaced by the word that appeared on the screen. After a response the fixation point would reappear on the screen in preparation for the next trial. The emotion words and neutral words were presented in separate blocks, which is a typical procedure in emotional Stroop studies (McKenna, 1986; McKenna & Sharma, 1995). The colour of the words (green or blue) was counterbalanced and the order in which the blocks appeared was counterbalanced across participants. Half of the Thai – English bilinguals were presented with the English words first and the other half with the Thai words. Each participant viewed 40 words (20 negative, 20 neutral) in each language. Six practice trials were completed prior to the 40 experimental trials. After completion of the emotional Stroop task, bilingual and monolingual speakers were asked to rate each word for pleasantness using a seven-point Likert scale, with 1 signifying very pleasant and 7 very unpleasant. The Thai –English bilingual participants rated words in Thai and in English, whereas the English monolinguals rated the words in English only. Half the bilingual participants rated the words in Thai and then in English, with the other half performing the rating in reverse order. RESULTS Emotionality-ratings of Thai and English words The level of significance adopted throughout all analyses was .05. Table 2 gives the mean rating scores


1095

490 485

Negative Words

480

Neutral Words

RT (ms)

475 470 465 460 455 450 445 440

Thai (L1)

English (L2) Bilinguals

English (L1) Monolinguals


Figure 1. Mean reaction times (ms) for negative and neutral words in the emotional Stroop task in the Thai–English bilinguals and the English native speakers.

of the Thai and English negative and neutral words by the Thai –English bilinguals and of the English negative and neutral words by the English native speakers. For the ratings made by the Thai – English bilinguals, a two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) was conducted with word type and language as within-subjects factors. The results revealed a significant main effect of word type, such that neutral words had lower rating scores than negative words, F (1, 53) ¼ 609.95, p , .001, h2p ¼ .919. No other effects were found to be significant. Similarly, for the English native speakers the results revealed that neutral words had lower rating scores than negative words, t(53) ¼ 23.45, p , .001. Furthermore, t-tests revealed that rating scores for the English negative and neutral words by the Thai –English bilinguals were not significantly different from those made by the English native speakers ( p values . .1). Emotional Stroop task Analysis of errors Errors in the emotional Stroop task accounted for less than 2% of the data for the Thai – English bilinguals (Thai emotion words: 1.7%, Thai neutral words: 1.7%, English emotion words: 1.8%, English neutral words: 1.7%) and the English native speakers (emotion words: 1.8%, neutral words: 1.8%). A series of t-tests revealed that there were no significant differences for the Thai – English bilinguals or the native English speakers (all p values . .1). Analysis of response latencies Only data for correct responses were analyzed. Response times less than 300 ms and over 1500 ms

were treated as outliers and were omitted from the analysis (proportions for Thai –English bilinguals for Thai words ¼ .001, for English words ¼ .002, and for the English speakers ¼ .002). In addition, response times that exceeded 2.5 standard deviations above the mean for each participant were replaced by the cut-off value (a similar procedure was used by Sutton et al., 2007). Figure 1 gives the mean reaction times for negative and neutral words in the emotional Stroop task in the Thai – English bilinguals and the English native speakers. For the latencies of the Thai – English bilinguals, a two-way ANOVA was conducted with word type and language as within-subjects factors. The results revealed a significant main effect of word type, F(1, 53) ¼ 4.96, p , .05, h2p ¼ .086, and of language, F(1, 53) ¼ 4.34, p , .05, h2p ¼ .076. More importantly, there was also a significant interaction effect between word type and language, F(1, 53) ¼ 5.20, p , .05, h2p ¼ .089. Paired samples ttests revealed that for Thai words, the latencies for negative words were significantly slower than for neutral words, t(53) ¼ 2.60, p , .05, but no significant difference was found for the English words ( p . .1). For the English native speakers, a repeated measures ANOVA for word type revealed that the latencies for the negative words were significantly longer than for neutral words, F(1, 53) ¼ 4.30, p , .05, h2p ¼ .059. In order to examine whether there was a positive relationship between English language proficiency (as assessed by the Word Comprehension Antonyms and Synonyms subtests of the WRMTR) and the emotional Stroop effect for the Thai – English bilinguals, a bivariate correlation between English language proficiency and the emotional Stroop effect

1096

WINSKEL

in English was calculated. However, no significant relationship was found ( p . .1).


DISCUSSION In the current study, we found an emotional Stroop effect in the dominant first language (Thai) spoken by the Thai – English bilinguals, but not in the weaker second language (English). These results contrast with those found by Sutton et al. (2007) in early balanced bilinguals and Eilola et al. (2007) in late bilinguals. Eilola et al. (2007) made the suggestion that relative levels of proficiency may be the important factor in producing interference in emotional Stroop tasks in bilinguals rather than age of acquisition per se. This possible explanation is supported by the Stroop results for the first languages spoken by the Thai –English bilingual and English native speakers. However, we failed to find a significant association between English language ability and interference in the emotional Stroop task, but possibly the proficiency levels of participants were not sufficiently varied to effectively assess that relationship and/or this measure does not act as an accurate index for English language proficiency in these bilinguals (especially as only the antonyms and synonyms subtests of the WRMT were used). However, the fact that we did find robust emotional Stroop effects in the first or native languages spoken by the bilingual and native English participants, but not in the L2 of the Thai– English bilinguals, points to proficiency in the language as being a key factor. We found a discrepancy in results for the two tasks, which involve different levels of processing. In the emotionality-ratings task similar results were found in both languages spoken by the Thai – English bilinguals, whereas in the emotional Stroop task only an effect for first language emerged. The rating responses for English words made by the bilinguals were also comparable to those made by the English native speakers. These contrasting results found for the emotional Stroop task and the emotionality-rating task in the Thai – English bilinguals point to the characteristics of the task and depth of processing as being important factors. In the emotional Stroop task, participants were trying to ignore the meanings of the words and merely focus on responding to the ink colour. Thus, any effect of the words on response times was likely to reflect unconscious, automatic, and early lexical processing, whereas in the emotionality-rating task the emotional words are more likely to be processed at a deeper and more conscious level (Ayc ic eg˘i-Dinn & Caldwell-Harris, 2009; Harris et al., 2003; Sutton et al., 2007). It

can be envisaged that with increasing levels of language proficiency, responses gradually become more automated, so that an emotional Stroop effect emerges. It takes time to acquire an equivalent level of automaticity in a second language. This is also illustrated by the discrepancy in results reported by Eilola and Havelka (2011), who found a comparable emotional Stroop effect in Greek –English bilinguals and in native English speakers but not a parallel skin conductance response. Hence, these results support the view that bilingual participants do not automatically respond to the connotative or emotional arousal associated with the meanings of L2 words to the same extent as in the L1. These results support the view that there is more likely to be a difference in activation of emotions in the two languages spoken by late rather than early bilinguals (e.g., Altarriba, 2008; Dewaele, 2004; Harris et al., 2003, 2006; Pavlenko, 2008). In addition, these results add support to models such as the revised hierarchical model (Kroll & Stewart, 1994) that propose that aspects of meaning associated with L1 words are privileged and have stronger connections compared to L2 words. For the Thai – English bilinguals, essentially the first language is the language of the home environment and so the underlying emotions associated with emotion words are learned within this context, whereas the weaker language is learned in the school or other educational context, and so presumably is more distantly associated with the underlying emotions associated with the words (Altarriba, 2008; Altarriba & Santiago-Riviera, 1994; Dewaele & Pavlenko, 2002). There was a disparity between results obtained in the current and previous emotional Stroop studies (Eilola & Havelka, 2011; Eilola et al., 2007; Sutton et al., 2007). This is likely to be due to the proficiency levels in English of the Thai – English bilinguals and the context in which they had learned English, predominantly as a foreign language. For example, only 57% of the Thai participants had spent a brief period overseas, whereas 100% of the Finnish participants in Eilola et al.’s (2007) study had spent time overseas and 44% of them had lived in an English-speaking environment for a year or longer. There are additional methodological differences between the studies including the number of colours used in the Stroop task, the types of words used, and whether words were repeated or not. In addition, Thai has its own distinctive script. These factors could all potentially impact on the results. This line of research has important pedagogical implications. In any L2 teaching or learning context, the connotations of words and expressions need to be taught, as this is a


crucial aspect of sociocultural and pragmatic competence. Manuscript received October 2012 Revised manuscript accepted February 2013 First published online May 2013


REFERENCES Altarriba, J. (2008). Expressions of emotion as mediated by context. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 165– 167. Altarriba, J., & Santiago-Rivera, A. L. (1994). Current perspectives on using linguistic and cultural factors in counseling the bilingual Spanish-speaking client. Professional Psychology: Research and Practice, 25, 388– 397. Andrews, S. (1992). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Lexical similarity or orthographic redundancy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 18, 234– 254. Anooshian, L. J., & Hertel, P. T. (1994). Emotionality in free recall: Language specificity in bilingual memory. Cognition and Emotion, 8, 503– 514. Ayc ic eg˘i, A., & Harris, C. L. (2004). Bilinguals’ recall and recognition of emotion words. Cognition and Emotion, 18, 977– 988. Ayc ic eg˘i-Dinn, A., & Caldwell-Harris, C. L. (2009). Emotion– memory effects in bilingual speakers: A levels of-processing approach. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 12, 291– 303. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Hutchinson, K. A., Neely, J. H., Nelson, D., Simpson, G. B., & Treiman, R. (2002). The English Lexicon Project: A web-based repository of descriptive and behavioral measures for 40,481 English words and non-words. Retrieved April 12, 2013 from http://elexicon.wustl.edu Bradley, M. M., & Lang, P. J. (1999). Affective norms for English words (ANEW). Gainesville, FL: NIMH Center for the Study of Emotion and Attention, University of Florida. Dewaele, J.- M. (2004). The emotional force of swearwords and taboo words in the speech of multilinguals. Journal of Multicultural and Multilingual Development, 25, 204– 222. Dewaele, J.- M., & Pavlenko, A. (2002). Emotion vocabulary in interlanguage. Language Learning, 52, 263– 322. Eilola, T. M., & Havelka, J. (2011). Behavioural and physiological responses to the emotional and taboo

1097

Stroop tasks in native and non-native speakers of English. International Journal of Bilingualism, 15, 353– 369. Eilola, T. M., Havelka, J., & Sharma, D. (2007). Emotional activation in the first and second language. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 1064– 1076. Harris, C. L., Ayc ic eg˘i, A., & Gleason, J. B. (2003). Taboo words and reprimands elicit greater autonomic reactivity in a first than in a second language. Applied Psycholinguistics, 24, 561– 578. Harris, C. L., Gleason, J. B., & Ayc ic eg˘i, A. (2006). When is a first language more emotional? Psychophysiological evidence from bilingual speakers. In A. Pavlenko (Ed.), Bilingual minds: Emotional experience, expression, and representation. Clevedon, UK: Multilingual Matters. Kroll, J. F., & Stewart, E. (1994). Category interference in translation and picture naming: Evidence for asymmetric connections between bilingual memory representations. Journal of Memory and Language, 33, 149– 174. Larsen, R. J., Mercer, K. A., & Balota, D. A. (2006). Lexical characteristics of words used in emotional Stroop experiments. Emotion, 6, 62– 72. Luksaneeyanawin, S. (2004). Thai word frequency based on two million word corpus of written genre texts. Bangkok, Thailand: Center for Research in Speech and Language Processing, Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University. Lund, K., & Burgess, C. (1996). Producing highdimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence. Behavioral Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 28, 203– 208. McKenna, F. P. (1986). Effects of unattended emotional stimuli on colour-naming performance. Current Psychological Research and Reviews, 5, 3 – 9. McKenna, F. P., & Sharma, D. (1995). Intrusive cognitions: An investigation of the emotional Stroop task. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 21, 1595– 1607. Pavlenko, A. (2008). Emotion and emotion-laden words in the bilingual lexicon. Bilingualism: Language and Cognition, 11, 147– 164. Pavlenko, A. (2012). Affective processing in bilingual speakers: Disembodied cognition? International Journal of Psychology, 47(6), 405– 428. Sutton, T. M., Altarriba, J., Gianico, J. L., & BasnightBrown, D. M. (2007). The automatic access of emotion: Emotional Stroop effects in Spanish– English bilingual speakers. Cognition and Emotion, 21, 1077– 1090. Williams, J. M. G., Mathews, A., & MacLeod, C. (1996). The emotional Stroop task and psychopathology. Psychological Bulletin, 120, 3 –24. Woodcock, R. W. (1998). Woodcock Reading Mastery Test – Revised (WRMTR). Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.

1098

WINSKEL

Appendix TABLE A1 List of the negative and neutral word stimuli used in the emotional Stroop task.


Negative words English Death Lonely Pain Angry Fear Crazy War Murder Sadness Scared Hate Disease Illness Funeral Debt Nervous Cheat Liar Fail Jealousy

Neutral words Thai ) )

English Kettle Brush Road Train Engine Rug Floor Chair Building Bus Table Plate Clock Bag Kitchen Door Television Window Telephone Printer

Thai )