| Literature DB >> 35447687 |
Daria Bukhalenkova1,2, Aleksander Veraksa1,2, Margarita Gavrilova1,2, Natalia Kartushina3.
Abstract
The effects of bilingualism on child development have been extensively examined in last decades. Research reveals that simultaneous use of two or more languages affects child's language development, cognitive and social skills. The current study focuses on the so-far understudied theory of emotion understanding in bilingual children. A cohort of 593 bilingual and monolingual 5-6-year-olds took the Russian version of the Test of Emotion Comprehension (TEC) that assesses three components of emotion understanding: emotion understanding of external causes of emotions, reflective causes of emotions; and mental causes of emotions. Our results revealed no group differences between overall emotion understanding and understanding of external and reflective causes of emotions. However, monolingual children had a slightly better understanding of mental causes of emotions compared to bilingual children, when controlling for age, gender, and non-verbal intelligence. These results suggest that children growing up in bilingual environments might require more time and/or language/culture exposure to master the ability to understand mental causes of emotions, taking into account cultural differences, as well as the semantic and lexical differences in emotion labelling and emotion expression in each language.Entities:
Keywords: bilingualism; culture; emotion understanding; language; non-verbal intelligence
Year: 2022 PMID: 35447687 PMCID: PMC9029717 DOI: 10.3390/bs12040115
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Behav Sci (Basel) ISSN: 2076-328X
Bilingual and monolingual children in the final sample.
| Region | Group |
| Age | Girls (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Monolingual | Bilingual | ||||
| Republic of Tatarstan | 92 | 94 | 186 | 5.28 (±0.36) | 59.1 |
| Moscow | 182 | 24 | 206 | 5.20 (±0.45) | 49.5 |
| Republic of Sakha (Yakutia) | 43 | 160 | 203 | 5.16 (±0.30) | 50.7 |
Description statistics for study variables.
| Group |
| Mean | Median | SD | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age | monolingual | 319 | 5.24 | 5.25 | 0.423 |
| bilingual | 278 | 5.18 | 5.17 | 0.315 | |
| Non-verbal intelligence | monolingual | 318 | 14.30 | 13.00 | 7.929 |
| bilingual | 277 | 13.62 | 13.00 | 7.554 | |
| TEC External | monolingual | 319 | 2.49 | 3.00 | 0.677 |
| bilingual | 278 | 2.46 | 3.00 | 0.733 | |
| TEC Mental | monolingual | 319 | 1.33 | 1.00 | 0.821 |
| bilingual | 278 | 1.12 | 1.00 | 0.726 | |
| TEC Reflective | monolingual | 319 | 1.21 | 1.00 | 0.842 |
| bilingual | 278 | 1.19 | 1.00 | 0.962 | |
| TEC Emotion | monolingual | 319 | 5.03 | 5.00 | 1.575 |
| bilingual | 278 | 4.77 | 5.00 | 1.639 |
Note: During the assessment, two children refused to complete the non-verbal intelligence test. For this reason, there were 277 children for this task.
Figure 1Ability to understand mental causes of emotions in monolingual (n = 319) and bilingual (n = 277) children with different levels of non-verbal fluid intelligence. Colored shades represent the confidence intervals. Note: non-verbal intelligence scores presented as Z scores.
Figure 2Ability to understand reflective causes of emotions for monolingual (n = 319) and bilingual (n = 277) children with different levels of non-verbal fluid intelligence. Colored shades represent the confidence intervals. Note: non-verbal intelligence scores presented as Z scores.