Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32116912›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in psychology2020

The Representation of Coordinate Relations in Lexical Semantic Memory.

Thomas M Gruenenfelder

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Thomas M GruenenfelderDepartment of Psychological and Brain Sciences, Indiana University Bloomington, Bloomington, IN, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Two experiments examined the size of the typicality effect for true items in a category verification task as a function of the type of false item used. In Experiment 1, compared to the case where false items paired unrelated concepts ("carrot-vehicle"), the typicality effect was much larger when false items paired an exemplar with a category coordinate to its proper category ("carrot-fruit"). In contrast, when false items paired coordinate concepts ("carrot-pea") or reversed the ordering of subject and predicate terms ("All vegetables are carrots"), the typicality effect did not change in size. Further, the time to verify true sentences did not increase monotonically with the semantic similarity of the two terms used in false sentences. Experiment 2 showed that the pattern of results for coordinate items reflected semantic processing, not simply task difficulty. A combined analysis examined data across multiple experiments, increasing the power of the statistical analysis. The size of the typicality effect when coordinate false items were used was again the same as when false items paired unrelated concepts. The most straightforward explanation of this pattern of results seems to be in terms of a

Indexed as

associative networksco-hyponymscoordinate relationshyponymslexical semantic memorysemantic memorysemantic networkssemantic relations

Identifiers

PMID32116912
PMCPMC7026369

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.