ArticleNeuropsychologia2018
Orthographic influence on spoken word identification: Behavioral and fMRI evidence.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Unique patterns of hearing loss and cognition in older adults' neural responses to cues for speech recognition difficulty.Brain structure & function · 2022Article
- Brain Activity during Visual and Auditory Word Rhyming Tasks in Cantonese-Mandarin-English Trilinguals.Brain sciences · 2020Article
- Using information-theoretic measures to characterize the structure of the writing system: the case of orthographic-phonological regularities in English.Behavior research methods · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The current study investigated behavioral and neuroimaging evidence for orthographic influences on auditory word identification. To assess such influences, the proportion of similar sounding words (i.e. phonological neighbors) that were also spelled similarly (i.e., orthographic neighbors) was computed for each auditorily presented word as the Orthographic-to-Phonological Overlap Ratio (OPOR). Speech intelligibility was manipulated by presenting monosyllabic words in multi-talker babble at two signal-to-noise ratios: + 3 and + 10 dB SNR. Identification rates were lower for high overlap words in the challenging + 3 dB SNR condition. In addition, BOLD contrast increased with OPOR at the more difficult SNR, and decreased with OPOR under more favorable SNR conditions. Both voxel-based and region of interest analyses demonstrated robust effects of OPOR in several cingulo-opercular regions. However, contrary to prior theoretical accounts, no task-related activity was observed in posterior regions associated with phonological or orthographic processing. We suggest that, when processing is difficult, orthographic-to-phonological feature overlap increases the availability of competing responses, which then requires additional support from domain general performance systems in order to produce a single response.
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.