ArticleHuman brain mapping2020
Neural representational similarity between L1 and L2 in spoken and written language processing.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Neural Assimilation and Accommodation in Trilinguals: An fMRI Study at 7 T.Human brain mapping · 2026Article
- Lexical Representations of the Native and Second Languages During L2 Word Reading in Chinese-English Bilinguals.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- Article
- Intersecting distributed networks support convergent linguistic functioning across different languages in bilinguals.Communications biology · 2023Article
- Native and non-native language contexts differently modulate mood-driven electrodermal activity.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Neural representation of phonological information during Chinese character reading.Human brain mapping · 2022Article
- Neural representational similarity between L1 and L2 in spoken and written language processing.Human brain mapping · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Despite substantial research on the brain mechanisms of L1 and L2 processing in bilinguals, it is still unknown whether language modality (i.e., visual vs. auditory) plays a role in determining whether L1 and L2 are processed similarly. Therefore, we examined the neural representational similarity in neural networks between L1 and L2 in spoken and written word processing in Korean-English-Chinese trilinguals. Participants performed both visual and auditory rhyming judgments in the three languages: Korean, English, and Chinese. The results showed greater similarity among the three languages in the auditory modality than in the visual modality, suggesting more differentiated networks for written word processing in the three languages than spoken word processing. In addition, there was less similarity between spoken and written word processing in L1 than the L2s, suggesting a more specialized network for each modality in L1 than L2s. Finally, the similarity between the two L2s (i.e., Chinese and English) was greater than that between each L2 and L1 after task performance was regressed out, especially in the visual modality, suggesting that L2s are processed similarly. These findings provide important insights about spoken and written language processing in the bilingual brain.
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.