ArticleFrontiers in psychology2023
Parallel phonological processing of Chinese characters revealed by flankers tasks.
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 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
An important and extensively researched question in the field of reading is whether readers can process multiple words in parallel. An unresolved issue regarding this question is whether the phonological information from foveal and parafoveal words can be processed in parallel, i.e., parallel phonological processing. The present study aims to investigate whether there is parallel phonological processing of Chinese characters. The original and the revised flankers tasks were applied. In both tasks, a foveal target character was presented in isolation in the no-flanker condition, flanked on both sides by a parafoveal homophone in the homophone-flanker condition, and by a non-homophonic character in the unrelated-flanker condition. Participants were instructed to fixate on the target characters and press two keys to indicate whether they knew the target characters (lexical vs. non-lexical). In the original flankers task, the stimuli were presented for 150 ms without a post-mask. In the revised flankers task, we set the stimulus exposure time (duration of the stimuli plus the blank interval between the stimuli and the post-mask) to each participant's lexical decision threshold to prevent participants from processing the target and flanker characters serially. In both tasks, reaction times to the lexical targets were significantly shorter in the homophone-flanker condition than in the unrelated-flanker condition, suggesting parallel phonological processing of Chinese characters. In the revised flankers task, accuracy rates to the lexical targets were significantly lower in the unrelated-flanker condition compared to the homophone-flanker condition, further supporting parallel phonological processing of Chinese characters. Moreover, reaction times to the lexical targets were the shortest in the no-flanker condition in both tasks, reflecting the attention distribution over both the target and flanker characters. The findings of this study provide valuable insights into the parallel processing mechanisms involved in 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.