Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32393584›Full record

ArticleeNeuro

How Do We Segment Text? Two-Stage Chunking Operation in Reading.

Jinbiao Yang 杨金骉, Qing Cai 蔡清, Xing Tian 田兴

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in eNeuro. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
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

3 authors.

Jinbiao Yang 杨金骉Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics- (Ministry of Education & Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality), Affiliated Mental Health Center, ECNU Shanghai Changning Mental Health Center, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China.ORCID 0000-0001-9337-0243
Qing Cai 蔡清Key Laboratory of Brain Functional Genomics- (Ministry of Education & Science and Technology Commission of Shanghai Municipality), Affiliated Mental Health Center, ECNU Shanghai Changning Mental Health Center, School of Psychology and Cognitive Science, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China xing.tian@nyu.edu qcai@psy.ecnu.edu.cn.
Xing Tian 田兴NYU-ECNU Institute of Brain and Cognitive Science at New York University Shanghai, Shanghai 200062, China xing.tian@nyu.edu qcai@psy.ecnu.edu.cn.ORCID 0000-0003-1629-6304

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chunking in language comprehension is a process that segments continuous linguistic input into smaller chunks that are in the reader's mental lexicon. Effective chunking during reading facilitates disambiguation and enhances efficiency for comprehension. However, the chunking mechanisms remain elusive, especially in reading, given that information arrives simultaneously yet the written systems may not have explicit cues for labeling boundaries such as Chinese. What are the mechanisms of chunking that mediates the reading of the text that contains hierarchical information? We investigated this question by manipulating the lexical status of the chunks at distinct levels in four-character Chinese strings, including the two-character local chunk and four-character global chunk. Male and female human participants were asked to make lexical decisions on these strings in a behavioral experiment, followed by a passive reading task when their electroencephalography (EEG) was recorded. The behavioral results showed that the lexical decision time of lexicalized two-character local chunks was influenced by the lexical status of the four-character global chunk, but not vice versa, which indicated the processing of global chunks possessed priority over the local chunks. The EEG results revealed that familiar lexical chunks were detected simultaneously at both levels and further processed in a different temporal order, the onset of lexical access for the global chunks was earlier than that of local chunks. These consistent results suggest a two-stage operation for chunking in reading, the simultaneous detection of familiar lexical chunks at multiple levels around 100 ms followed by recognition of chunks with global precedence.

Indexed as

MemoryReadingComprehensionCuesFemaleHumansMaleRecognition, PsychologyEEGhierarchylexical accessreadingsegmentation

Identifiers

PMID32393584
PMCPMC7294464

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.