ArticleBrain sciences2019
ERP Evidence for Co-Activation of English Words during Recognition of American Sign Language Signs.
Article in Brain sciences, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Predictive Processing in Sign Languages: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- Neural associations between fingerspelling, print, and signs: An ERP priming study with deaf readers.Brain and language · 2025Article
- Production of real signs but not pseudosigns affected by age of acquisition in American Sign Language.Memory & cognition · 2025Article
- Speakers of different languages remember visual scenes differently.Science advances · 2023Article
- Fingerspelling and Its Role in Translanguaging.Languages (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
- Cross-modal and cross-language activation in bilinguals reveals lexical competition even when words or signs are unheard or unseen.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022Article
- Are form priming effects phonological or perceptual? Electrophysiological evidence from American Sign Language.Cognition · 2022Article
- Tracking the time course of sign recognition using ERP repetition priming.Psychophysiology · 2022Article
- Ongoing Sign Processing Facilitates Written Word Recognition in Deaf Native Signing Children.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
- The organization of the American Sign Language lexicon: Comparing one- and two-parameter ERP phonological priming effects across tasks.Brain and language · 2021Article
- Assessing the Evidence for Asymmetrical Switch Costs and Reversed Language Dominance Effects - A Meta-Analysis.Journal of cognition · 2021Review
- The sign superiority effect: Lexical status facilitates peripheral handshape identification for deaf signers.Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance · 2020Article
- Cross-linguistic metaphor priming in ASL-English bilinguals: Effects of the Double Mapping Constraint.Sign language and linguistics · 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
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Event-related potentials (ERPs) were used to investigate co-activation of English words during recognition of American Sign Language (ASL) signs. Deaf and hearing signers viewed pairs of ASL signs and judged their semantic relatedness. Half of the semantically unrelated signs had English translations that shared an orthographic and phonological rime (e.g., BAR-STAR) and half did not (e.g., NURSE-STAR). Classic N400 and behavioral semantic priming effects were observed in both groups. For hearing signers, targets in sign pairs with English rime translations elicited a smaller N400 compared to targets in pairs with unrelated English translations. In contrast, a reversed N400 effect was observed for deaf signers: target signs in English rime translation pairs elicited a larger N400 compared to targets in pairs with unrelated English translations. This reversed effect was overtaken by a later, more typical ERP priming effect for deaf signers who were aware of the manipulation. These findings provide evidence that implicit language co-activation in bimodal bilinguals is bidirectional. However, the distinct pattern of effects in deaf and hearing signers suggests that it may be modulated by differences in language proficiency and dominance as well as by asymmetric reliance on orthographic versus phonological representations.
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.