ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2020
Orthographic and phonological contributions to flanker effects.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Effects of flanker size and flanker eccentricity on the spatial integration of orthographic information.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026Article
- Open-bigrams as orthographic processing units in Arabic: Evidence from the flanking-letters lexical-decision task.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Word superiority and sentence superiority effects in post-cued letter-in-string identification.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
- Tracking the Effects of Eccentricity on the Integration of Orthographic Information From Multiple Words.Journal of cognition · 2025Article
- Letters, Words, Sentences, and Reading.Journal of cognition · 2024Review
- Parallel phonological processing of Chinese characters revealed by flankers tasks.Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- Lexical competition in the flankers task revisited.PloS one · 2023Article
- Now you see it, now you don't: Flanker presence induces the word concreteness effect.Cognition · 2022Article
- On the noisy spatiotopic encoding of word positions during reading: Evidence from the change-detection task.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2021Article
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 at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Does phonology contribute to effects of orthographically related flankers in the flankers task? In order to answer this question, we implemented the flanker equivalent of a pseudohomophone priming manipulation that has been widely used to demonstrate automatic phonological processing during visual word recognition. In Experiment 1, central target words were flanked on each side by either a pseudohomophone of the target (e.g., roze rose roze), an orthographic control pseudoword (rone rose rone), or an unrelated pseudoword (mirt rose mirt). Both the pseudohomophone and the orthographic control conditions produced faster and more accurate responses to central targets, but performance in these two conditions did not differ significantly. Experiment 2 tested the same stimuli in a masked priming paradigm and replicated the standard finding in French that pseudohomophone primes produce significantly faster responses to target words than orthographic control primes. Therefore, contrary to its impact on masked priming, phonology does not contribute to effects of flanker relatedness, which would appear to be driven primarily by orthographic overlap.
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.