Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36543850›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Transposed-word effects in speeded grammatical decisions to sequences of spoken words.

Sophie Dufour, Jonathan Mirault, Jonathan Grainger

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing 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

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. The impact of case changes on transposed-word effects.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Decoupling speech processing from time.Trends in cognitive sciences · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Letters, Words, Sentences, and Reading.Journal of cognition · 2024
    Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. 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

3 authors.

Sophie DufourLaboratoire Parole et Langage, Aix-Marseille Université, CNRS, LPL, UMR 7309, 5, avenue Pasteur, 13100, Aix-en-Provence, France. sophie.dufour@univ-amu.fr.
Jonathan MiraultLaboratoire de Psychologie Cognitive, Aix-Marseille Université & CNRS, Marseille, France.
Jonathan GraingerLaboratoire de Psychologie Cognitive, Aix-Marseille Université & CNRS, Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We used the grammatical decision task (a speeded version of the grammaticality judgment task) with auditorily presented sequences of five words that could either form a grammatically correct sentence or an ungrammatical sequence. The critical ungrammatical sequences were either formed by transposing two adjacent words in a correct sentence (transposed-word sequences: e.g., "The black was dog big") or were matched ungrammatical sequences that could not be resolved into a correct sentence by transposing any two words (control sequences: e.g., "The black was dog slowly"). These were intermixed with an equal number of correct sentences for the purpose of the grammatical decision task. Transposed-word sequences were harder to reject as being ungrammatical (longer response times and more errors) relative to the ungrammatical control sequences, hence attesting for the first time that transposed-word effects can be observed in the spoken language version of the grammatical decision task. Given the relatively unambiguous nature of the speech input in terms of word order, we interpret these transposed-word effects as reflecting the constraints imposed by syntax when processing a sequence of spoken words in order to make a speeded grammatical decision.

Indexed as

JudgmentLanguage

Identifiers

PMID36543850
PMCPMC9772206

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.