Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33678947›Full record

ArticleJournal of memory and language2020

To catch a Snitch: Brain potentials reveal variability in the functional organization of (fictional) world knowledge during reading.

Melissa Troyer, Marta Kutas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of memory and language, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
11citing 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

11 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. 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

2 authors.

Melissa TroyerDepartment of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, United States of America.
Marta KutasDepartment of Cognitive Science, University of California, San Diego, United States of America.

Funding

ELECTROPHYSIOLOGY OF LINGUISTIC PROCESSINGR01HD022614 · NICHD · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO · PI KUTAS, MARTA · 1987 to 2020
$9.3M
NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD022614
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We harnessed the temporal sensitivity of event-related brain potentials (ERPs) alongside individual differences in Harry Potter (HP) knowledge to investigate the extent to which the availability and timing of information relevant for real-time written word processing are influenced by variation in domain knowledge. We manipulated meaningful (category, event) relationships between sentence fragments about HP stories and their sentence final words. During word-by-word reading, N400 amplitudes to (a) linguistically supported and (b) unsupported but meaningfully related, but not to (c) unsupported, unrelated sentence endings varied with HP domain knowledge. Single-trial analyses revealed that only the N400s to linguistically supported (but not to either type of unsupported) sentence-final words varied as a function of whether individuals knew (or could remember) the correct (supported) ending for each HP "fact." We conclude that the quick availability of information relevant for word understanding in sentences is a function of individuals' knowledge of both specific facts and the domain to which the facts belong. During written sentence processing, as domain knowledge increases, it is clearly evident that individuals can make use of the relevant knowledge systematically organized around themes, events, and categories in that domain, to the extent they have it.

Indexed as

event-related brain potentialsindividual differencesknowledgesemantic memorysentence processing

Identifiers

PMID33678947
PMCPMC7928424

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.