Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37326763›Full record

ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2023

The Effect of Phonetic Similarity on Domain-General Executive Control in Color-Shape Task: Evidence from Cantonese-Mandarin and Beijing-Dialect-Mandarin Bidialectals.

Aitao Lu, Siyi Liu, Jijia Zhang, Meifang Zhang, Tianhua Song, Lu Wang, Xuebin Wang

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Aitao Lu *Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China; School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China. atlupsy@gmail.com.
Siyi Liu *Philosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China; School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5879-6422
Jijia ZhangThe Department of Psychology & the Laboratory of the Department of Psychology, Renmin University of China, Beijing, 100872, China. zhangjj1955@163.com.
Meifang ZhangPhilosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China; School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Tianhua SongPhilosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China; School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Lu WangPhilosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China; School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.
Xuebin WangPhilosophy and Social Science Laboratory of Reading and Development in Children and Adolescents (South China Normal University), Ministry of Education, China; School of Psychology, Center for Studies of Psychological Application, and Guangdong Key Laboratory of Mental Health and Cognitive Science, South China Normal University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, China.

Funding

the Foundation for Outstanding Young Scholars in Guangzhou No.18QNXR11the Key Institute of Humanities and Social Sciences No.16JJD880025the Key Laboratory for Social Sciences of Guangdong Province No.2015WSY009the National Natural Science Foundation of China No.62007009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study was carried out to investigate whether bidialectals have a similar advantage in domain-general executive function as bilinguals and if so whether the phonetic similarity between two different dialects can modulate the executive function performance in the conflicting-switching task. The results showed that the latencies for switching trials in mixed block (SMs) were longest, non-switching trials in mixed block (NMs) were medium, and non-switching trials in pure block (NPs) were the shortest in the conflict-switching task in all three groups of participants. Importantly, the difference between NPs and NMs varied as a function of phonetic similarity between two dialects with Cantonese-Mandarin bidialectal speakers being the minimum, Beijing-dialect-Mandarin bidialectals medium, and Mandarin native speakers maximum. These results provide strong evidence that there is an advantage in balanced bidialectals's executive function which is modulated by the phonetic similarity between two dialects suggesting that phonetic similarity plays an important role in domain-general executive function.

Indexed as

Executive FunctionMultilingualismBeijingHumansLanguagePhoneticsBidialectalColor-shape taskExecutive functionPhonetic similaritySwitching cost

Identifiers

PMID37326763

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.