ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Examining interhemispheric processing and task demand in lexical decision-making: insights from lateralized visual field paradigm.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Hemispheric transfer and dyslexia: testing the deficit hypothesis for word and symmetry recognition using visual half-field tasks.Journal of neurodevelopmental disorders · 2026Article
- Interhemispheric interactions in visual word recognition: the role of multiple meanings.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Temporal dynamics of hemispheric interactions in visual word recognition using a repetition priming paradigm: modulation by stimulus onset asynchrony.Frontiers in psychology · 2025Article
- Contributions of hemispheric dynamics in visual word recognition: uncovering familiarity effects through lateralized priming.Frontiers in psychology · 2024Article
- Decoding foveal word recognition: the role of interhemispheric inhibition in bilateral hemispheric processing.Frontiers in psychology · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This study aimed to investigate the influence of task demand on the uni-/bi-hemispheric processing of lexical decision-making. Two types of nonwords were used in parafoveal and foveal lexical decision tasks (LDTs) to manipulate task demand. In Experiment 1, a visual half-field paradigm was utilized to evaluate the unihemispheric strategy in lexical decision, which revealed a significant response bias toward "word" at the RVF/LH in the pseudoword LDT in contrast with the nonword LDT, indicating the strategic use of orthographical legality in LH for word-pseudoword lexical decision. In Experiment 2, the study evaluated whether foveal lexical decision follows the orthographical legality strategy of LH in pseudoword LDT relative to the nonword LDT. The results showed a response bias toward "word" in the foveal pseudoword LDT in contrast with the foveal nonword LDT, suggesting the recruitment of LH in foveal pseudoword LDT. These findings support the left-dominant bihemispheric processing in foveal lexical decision and contribute to our understanding of the mechanisms underlying lexical decision-making.
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.