ArticleBilingualism (Cambridge, England)2020
Cross-modal translation priming and iconicity effects in deaf signers and hearing learners of American Sign Language.
Article in Bilingualism (Cambridge, England), 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 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
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Iconicity and transparency in Dutch Sign Language.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
- The neural response to highly iconic signs in hearing learners and deaf signers.Brain and language · 2026Article
- Neural associations between fingerspelling, print, and signs: An ERP priming study with deaf readers.Brain and language · 2025Article
- The Relationship Between Community Size and Iconicity in Sign Languages.Cognitive science · 2025Article
- A lexical database of British Sign Language (BSL) and German Sign Language (DGS): Iconicity ratings, iconic strategies, and concreteness norms.Behavior research methods · 2025Article
- Neural effects differ for learning highly iconic versus non-iconic signs in hearing adults.Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) · 2024Article
- Language dominance and order of acquisition affect auditory translation priming in heritage speakers.Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006) · 2023Article
- Sign learning of hearing children in inclusive day care centers-does iconicity matter?Frontiers in psychology · 2023Article
- The effects of multiple linguistic variables on picture naming in American Sign Language.Behavior research methods · 2022Article
- Tracking the time course of sign recognition using ERP repetition priming.Psychophysiology · 2022Article
- Sign and Spoken Language Processing Differences in the Brain: A Brief Review of Recent Research.Annals of neurosciences · 2022Review
- New Perspectives on the Neurobiology of Sign Languages.Frontiers in communication · 2021Article
- Matching pictures and signs: An ERP study of the effects of iconic structural alignment in American sign language.Neuropsychologia · 2021Article
- Cross-linguistic metaphor priming in ASL-English bilinguals: Effects of the Double Mapping Constraint.Sign language and linguistics · 2020Article
- Neurophysiological Correlates of Frequency, Concreteness, and Iconicity in American Sign Language.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 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
This study used ERPs to a) assess the neural correlates of cross-linguistic, cross-modal translation priming in hearing beginning learners of American Sign Language (ASL) and deaf highly proficient signers and b) examine whether sign iconicity modulates these priming effects. Hearing learners exhibited translation priming for ASL signs preceded by English words (greater negativity for unrelated than translation primes) later in the ERP waveform than deaf signers and exhibited earlier and greater priming for iconic than non-iconic signs. Iconicity did not modulate translation priming effects either behaviorally or in the ERPs for deaf signers (except in a 800-1000 ms time window). Because deaf signers showed early translation priming effects (beginning at 400ms-600ms), we suggest that iconicity did not facilitate lexical access, but deaf signers may have recognized sign iconicity later in processing. Overall, the results indicate that iconicity speeds lexical access for L2 sign language learners, but not for proficient signers.
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.