ArticleHuman brain mapping2023
Stronger neural response to canonical finger-number configurations in deaf compared to hearing adults revealed by FPVS-EEG.
Article in Human brain mapping, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 5 citations in OpenAlex.
- No Evidence for Unconscious Attentional Bias in People With Clinically Significant Symptoms of Functional Gastrointestinal Disorders: A Study Using the Emerging Electroencephalographic Paradigm of Fast Periodic Visual Stimulation.Neurogastroenterology and motility · 2025Article
- Numerical format integration in primary school children examined with frequency-tagged electroencephalography.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Stronger neural response to canonical finger-number configurations in deaf compared to hearing adults revealed by FPVS-EEG.Human brain mapping · 2023Article
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 at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The linguistic counting system of deaf signers consists of a manual counting format that uses specific structures for number words. Interestingly, the number signs from 1 to 4 in the Belgian sign languages correspond to the finger-montring habits of hearing individuals. These hand configurations could therefore be considered as signs (i.e., part of a language system) for deaf, while they would simply be number gestures (not linguistic) for hearing controls. A Fast Periodic Visual Stimulation design was used with electroencephalography recordings to examine whether these finger-number configurations are differently processed by the brain when they are signs (in deaf signers) as compared to when they are gestures (in hearing controls). Results showed that deaf signers show stronger discrimination responses to canonical finger-montring configurations compared to hearing controls. A second control experiment furthermore demonstrated that this finding was not merely due to the experience deaf signers have with the processing of hand configurations, as brain responses did not differ between groups for finger-counting configurations. Number configurations are therefore processed differently by deaf signers, but only when these configurations are part of their language system.
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.