A meta-analysis of hemodynamic studies on first and second language processing: 
Which suggested differences can we trust and what do they mean?

Indefrey, Peter

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00365.x

Item

ITEM ACTIONSEXPORT

Add to Basket

Local TagsRelease HistoryDetailsSummary

Released

Journal Article

A meta-analysis of hemodynamic studies on first and second language processing: Which suggested differences can we trust and what do they mean?

MPS-Authors

/persons/resource/persons80

Indefrey, Peter
Language Acquisition Group, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;
The Dynamics of Multilingual Processing, MPI for Psycholinguistics, Max Planck Society;

External Resource

No external resources are shared

Fulltext (restricted access)

There are currently no full texts shared for your IP range.

Fulltext (public)

Indefrey_2006_Meta-analysis.pdf
(Publisher version), 268KB

Supplementary Material (public)

There is no public supplementary material available

Citation

Indefrey, P. (2006). A meta-analysis of hemodynamic studies on first and second language processing: Which suggested differences can we trust and what do they mean? Language Learning, 56(suppl. 1), 279-304. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00365.x.

Cite as: https://hdl.handle.net/11858/00-001M-0000-0013-178D-D

Abstract

This article presents the results of a meta-analysis of 30 hemodynamic experiments comparing first language (L1) and second language (L2) processing in a range of tasks. The results suggest that reliably stronger activation during L2 processing is found (a) only for task-specific subgroups of L2 speakers and (b) within some, but not all regions that are also typically activated in native language processing. A tentative interpretation based on the functional roles of frontal and temporal regions is suggested.