ArticleAttention, perception & psychophysics2023
General cognitive processing for orthographic discrepancy engages foveal attention during sentence comprehension.
Article in Attention, perception & psychophysics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Words are processed in the parafovea and fovea in succession during natural reading, but the classic rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm presents words only in the fovea. Unlike the RSVP paradigm, the RSVP with flanker (RSVP-flanker) paradigm is similar to natural text reading. Previous studies using the RSVP-flanker paradigm have suggested that high-level semantic/syntactic integration engages foveal fixation after parafoveal semantic access. However, it is less clear how general cognitive processing, such as discrepancy monitoring and error correction, unfolds across the parafoveal and foveal visual fields. In the current study, Chinese sentences were presented with the RSVP-flanker paradigm. Critical words were manipulated so that they were expected (EXP), semantically violated (VIO), or orthographically similar (ORT). Because of the nuanced differences between the EXP and ORT conditions, the processing of ORT critical words required more general cognitive processing, such as discrepancy monitoring and error correction. In contrast, the processing of VIO words may require more semantic integration. The ERP results showed more positive foveal late positive component (LPC) in ORT versus VIO. Moreover, there was no parafoveal LPC effect, but a robust foveal LPC effect, in the contrasts of VIO/ORT versus EXP, replicating previous results. Together, the results provide substantial evidence that general cognitive processing for orthographic discrepancy occurs at the foveal perception.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37442894What 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.