Cited by 120Neurobiology of Language and BilingualismEFL/ESL Teaching and LearningSecond Language Acquisition and Learning

Event-related Potentials (ERPs) in Second Language Research: A Brief Introduction to the Technique, a Selected Review, and an Invitation to Reconsider Critical Periods in L2

Steinhauer, K.·2014·Applied Linguistics

Abstract

This article provides a selective overview of recent event-related brain potential (ERP) studies in L2 morpho-syntax, demonstrating that the ERP evidence supporting the critical period hypothesis (CPH) may be less compelling than previously thought. The article starts with a general introduction to ERP methodology and language-related ERP profiles in native speakers. The second section presents early ERP studies supporting the CPH, discusses some of their methodological problems, and follows up with data from more recent studies avoiding these problems. It is concluded that well-controlled ERP studies support the convergence hypothesis, according to which L2 learners initially differ from native speakers and then converge on native-like neurocognitive processing mechanisms. The fact that ERPs in late L2 learners at high levels of proficiency are often indistinguishable from those of native speakers suggests that age-of-acquisition effects in SLA are not primarily driven by maturational constraints.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/applin/amu028

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Brain-imaging techniques do not permit learners to engage in spontaneous interaction invoking different cognitive functions.

    “probably because brain-imaging technique (e.g.event-related potentials (ERPs), functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI)) does not permit learners to engage in spontaneous interaction invoking different cognitive functions (see Steinhauer 2014;Morgan-Short, Faretta-Stutenberg & Bartlett-Hsu 2015).”

    From Interaction and instructed second language acquisition (2018) · cites this paper as Steinhauer 2014

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Steinhauer, K.
Affiliations
Centre for Research on Brain Language and Music (CA)
Corresponding author
Steinhauer, K.
Venue
Applied Linguistics
Published
2014-06-26
Volume
35
Issue
4
Pages
393-417
ISSN
  • 0142-6001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1477-450X
OpenAlex
W1984041204
Cited by
120
References
2
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 10 · 2022: 24 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 12 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 2
FWCI
5.20
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Applied Linguistics (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • Canada Research Chairs
  • Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › EFL/ESL Teaching and Learning
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Second Language Acquisition and Learning
Keywords
event-related potentials, second language acquisition, critical period hypothesis, convergence hypothesis, age of acquisition, maturational constraints

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review