ArticlePsychophysiology2022
Tracking the time course of sign recognition using ERP repetition priming.
Article in Psychophysiology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Predictive Processing in Sign Languages: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in psychology · 2022Pooled it
- The neural response to highly iconic signs in hearing learners and deaf signers.Brain and language · 2026Article
- Semantic processing of iconic signs is not automatic: Neural evidence from hearing non-signers.Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) · 2025Article
- Neural effects differ for learning highly iconic versus non-iconic signs in hearing adults.Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) · 2024Article
- Ten things you should know about sign languages.Current directions in psychological science · 2023Article
- Using transitional information in sign and gesture perception.Acta psychologica · 2023Article
- Cross-modal translation priming and iconicity effects in deaf signers and hearing learners of American Sign Language.Bilingualism (Cambridge, England) · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Repetition priming and event-related potentials (ERPs) were used to investigate the time course of sign recognition in deaf users of American Sign Language. Signers performed a go/no-go semantic categorization task to rare probe signs referring to people; critical target items were repeated and unrelated signs. In Experiment 1, ERPs were time-locked either to the onset of the video or to sign onset within the video; in Experiment 2, the same full videos were clipped so that video and sign onset were aligned (removing transitional movements), and ERPs were time-locked to video/sign onset. All analyses revealed an N400 repetition priming effect (less negativity for repeated than unrelated signs) but differed in the timing and/or duration of the N400 effect. Results from Experiment 1 revealed that repetition priming effects began before sign onset within a video, suggesting that signers are sensitive to linguistic information within the transitional movement to sign onset. The timing and duration of the N400 for clipped videos were more parallel to that observed previously for auditorily presented words and was 200 ms shorter than either time-locking analysis from Experiment 1. We conclude that time-locking to full video onset is optimal when early ERP components or sensitivity to transitional movements are of interest and that time-locking to the onset of clipped videos is optimal for priming studies with fluent 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.