ArticleBehavior research methods2020
Matrices of the frequency and similarity of Arabic letters and allographs.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2020. 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.
- An Eye-Tracking Study on the Interword Spacing Effect in Arabic.Journal of psycholinguistic research · 2026Article
- Open-bigrams as orthographic processing units in Arabic: Evidence from the flanking-letters lexical-decision task.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- The influence of visual attention on letter recognition and reading acquisition in Arabic.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Parafoveal letter identification in Russian: Confusion matrices based on error rates.Behavior research methods · 2024Article
- Letters, Words, Sentences, and Reading.Journal of cognition · 2024Review
- Factors Influencing the Accurate Identification of Written Minimal Pairs with Graphemic Similarity: Evidence from Persian-Speaking Children and Adults.Journal of psycholinguistic research · 2022Article
- WordPars: A tool for orthographic and phonological neighborhood and other psycholinguistic statistics in Persian.Behavior research methods · 2022Article
- Visual attention span as a predictor of reading fluency and reading comprehension in Arabic.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Indicators of letter frequency and similarity have long been available for Indo-European languages. They have not only been pivotal in controlling the design of experimental psycholinguistic studies seeking to determine the factors that underlie reading ability and literacy acquisition, but have also been useful for studies examining the more general aspects of human cognition. Despite their importance, however, such indicators are still not available for Modern Standard Arabic (MSA), a language that, by virtue of its orthographic system, presents an invaluable environment for the experimental investigation of visual word processing. This paper presents for the first time the frequencies of Arabic letters and their allographs based on a 40-million-word corpus, along with their similarity/confusability indicators in three domains: (1) the visual domain, based on human ratings; (2) the auditory domain, based on an analysis of the phonetic features of letter sounds; and (3) the motoric domain, based on an analysis of the stroke features used to write letters and their allographs. Taken together, the frequency and similarity of Arabic letters and their allographs in the visual and motoric domains, as well as the similarities among the letter sounds, will be useful for researchers interested in the processes underpinning orthographic processing, visual word recognition, reading, and literacy acquisition.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32077081What 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.