Intrinsic Functional Connectivity in the Adult Brain and Success in Second-Language Learning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
There is considerable variability in an individual's ability to acquire a second language (L2) during adulthood. Using resting-state fMRI data acquired before training in English speakers who underwent a 12 week intensive French immersion training course, we investigated whether individual differences in intrinsic resting-state functional connectivity relate to a person's ability to acquire an L2. We focused on two key aspects of language processing--lexical retrieval in spontaneous speech and reading speed--and computed whole-brain functional connectivity from two regions of interest in the language network, namely the left anterior insula/frontal operculum (AI/FO) and the visual word form area (VWFA). Connectivity between the left AI/FO and left posterior superior temporal gyrus (STG) and between the left AI/FO and dorsal anterior cingulate cortex correlated positively with improvement in L2 lexical retrieval in spontaneous speech. Connectivity between the VWFA and left mid-STG correlated positively with improvement in L2 reading speed. These findings are consistent with the different language functions subserved by subcomponents of the language network and suggest that the human capacity to learn an L2 can be predicted by an individual's intrinsic functional connectivity within the language network. Significance statement: There is considerable variability in second-language learning abilities during adulthood. We investigated whether individual differences in intrinsic functional connectivity in the adult brain relate to success in second-language learning, using resting-state functional magnetic resonance imaging in English speakers who underwent a 12 week intensive French immersion training course. We found that pretraining functional connectivity within two different language subnetworks correlated strongly with learning outcome in two different language skills: lexical retrieval in spontaneous speech and reading speed. Our results suggest that the human capacity to learn a second language can be predicted by an individual's intrinsic functional connectivity within the language network.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".