ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
The role of orthographic and phonological processing during reading Chinese sentences: Evidence from eye movements.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The role of phonological and orthographic processing and their time course during lexical processing and sentence reading remain controversial. By adopting a misspelled-characters disruption paradigm and eye-tracking technique, we manipulated the writing for the first characters of two-character target words to investigate the relative role of orthographic and phonological processing on word recognition in Chinese reading. There are four conditions: (a) correct character, (b) misspelled character with a stroke missing, (c) misspelled homographic character, and (d) misspelled homophonic character. The results showed that homophonic errors caused more disruptions than other conditions in the early (first-pass reading times) and later (total reading time) stages of lexical processing during Chinese reading. Homographic errors and omitted stroke errors lead to equal disruptions at the early stage of word recognition, but homographic errors cause more disruptions at the later stage. These results suggest that orthography plays a dominant role in word recognition during Chinese reading, whereas phonology plays a weaker and more limited role. The direct access and dual-rote hypothesis may well explain the mechanism of lexical processing in Chinese reading.
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.