ArticleScientific reports2016
Near-instant automatic access to visually presented words in the human neocortex: neuromagnetic evidence.
Article in Scientific reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Semantics and syntax effects on event-related fields during speech comprehension: a MEG study.Frontiers in human neuroscience · 2026Article
- Chronotype, Time of Day, and Children's Cognitive Performance in Remote Neuropsychological Assessment.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Relevance acquisition through motivational incentives: Modeling the time-course of associative learning and the role of visual features.Imaging neuroscience (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2024Article
- Early lexical processing of Chinese one-character words and Mongolian words: A comparative study using event-related potentials.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- Contextual Acquisition of Concrete and Abstract Words: Behavioural and Electrophysiological Evidence.Brain sciences · 2021Article
- Parafoveal previews and lexical frequency in natural reading: Evidence from eye movements and fixation-related potentials.Journal of experimental psychology. General · 2019Article
- Impaired neural mechanism for online novel word acquisition in dyslexic children.Scientific reports · 2018Article
- Automatic Lexical Access in Visual Modality: Eye-Tracking Evidence.Frontiers in psychology · 2018Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rapid and efficient processing of external information by the brain is vital to survival in a highly dynamic environment. The key channel humans use to exchange information is language, but the neural underpinnings of its processing are still not fully understood. We investigated the spatio-temporal dynamics of neural access to word representations in the brain by scrutinising the brain's activity elicited in response to psycholinguistically, visually and phonologically matched groups of familiar words and meaningless pseudowords. Stimuli were briefly presented on the visual-field periphery to experimental participants whose attention was occupied with a non-linguistic visual feature-detection task. The neural activation elicited by these unattended orthographic stimuli was recorded using multi-channel whole-head magnetoencephalography, and the timecourse of lexically-specific neuromagnetic responses was assessed in sensor space as well as at the level of cortical sources, estimated using individual MR-based distributed source reconstruction. Our results demonstrate a neocortical signature of automatic near-instant access to word representations in the brain: activity in the perisylvian language network characterised by specific activation enhancement for familiar words, starting as early as ~70 ms after the onset of unattended word stimuli and underpinned by temporal and inferior-frontal cortices.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.