Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36650350›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2023

Conceptual combination during novel and existing compound word reading in context: A self-paced reading study.

Shaina Benjamin, Daniel Schmidtke

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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.

Shaina BenjaminDepartment of Linguistics and Languages, McMaster University, MELD Office 4045, L.R. Wilson Hall, Hamilton, L8N 1E9, Ontario, ON, Canada.
Daniel SchmidtkeDepartment of Linguistics and Languages, McMaster University, MELD Office 4045, L.R. Wilson Hall, Hamilton, L8N 1E9, Ontario, ON, Canada. schmiddf@mcmaster.ca.ORCID 0000-0002-6518-9778

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

According to the relation-interpretation-competition-evaluation (RICE) hypothesis, compound word processing involves selecting a relational meaning (e.g., moonlight is 'light from moon') from a larger set of competing possible relational meanings. Prior lexical decision experiments with existing compound words have demonstrated that greater entropy of conceptual relations, i.e., greater competition between conceptual relations, impedes lexical processing speed. The present study addresses two unresolved issues: First, it is unclear whether the competition effect generalizes to the processing of novel compounds (e.g., grassladder), and second, it is not yet known whether competition between possible relational meanings extends to compounds when they are read in a sentence context. A series of self-paced reading tasks examined whether the competition effect operates regardless of (i) compound type (existing vs. novel), and (ii) whether sentence context (semantically supportive vs. semantically non-supportive) moderates the competition effect. The experiments confirmed that reading times of novel and existing compounds read in sentences were impacted by entropy of conceptual relations. Moreover, the effect was equally strong in both sentence context types. Additional analyses indicated that relational meanings are more ambiguous and flexible across different contexts for novel compounds compared to existing compounds.

Indexed as

LanguageSemanticsHumansCompoundingConceptual combinationMorphologyReadingWord recognition

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.