MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4416280331 · doi:10.1037/cep0000391

Investigating the effects of second language background, proficiency, and usage on episodic memory in middle-aged and older adults.

2025· article· en· W4416280331 on OpenAlexafffund
Bassam Jeryous Fares, Vanessa Taler

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsEpisodic memoryNeuroscience of multilingualismCognitionNonverbal communicationTask (project management)Age of AcquisitionRecallAutobiographical memoryTask analysis

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As the aging population grows, it is important to investigate factors that protect against cognitive decline. Bilingualism is hypothesized to contribute to cognitive reserve. However, the research on the influence of bilingualism and related variables (e.g., age of second language [L2] acquisition and language usage) on episodic memory remains sparse. We investigate the role of L2 age of acquisition, proficiency, and usage on verbal and nonverbal episodic memory in middle-aged and older adult bilingual speakers of English and French. Accuracy on a verbal memory task was negatively associated with L2 usage at work. People with lower L2 proficiency and usage at home performed better on a nonverbal memory task in terms of accuracy and reaction time, respectively. Earlier L2 acquisition was associated with higher accuracy on the nonverbal memory task. We hypothesize that greater L2 engagement leads to increased effort to inhibit nonrelevant stimuli, impeding episodic memory retrieval, and the effort required is lower with earlier L2 acquisition. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved).

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.012
Threshold uncertainty score0.023

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.028
GPT teacher head0.302
Teacher spread0.275 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Experimental Psychology/Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentaleSame topicNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismFrench-language works237,207