Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38443678›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2024

Computer programmers show distinct, expertise-dependent brain responses to violations in form and meaning when reading code.

Chu-Hsuan Kuo, Chantel S Prat

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing 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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
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

2 authors.

Chu-Hsuan KuoDepartment of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. kuoc6@uw.edu.
Chantel S PratDepartment of Psychology, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA.

Funding

Office of Naval Research N00014-20-1-2393
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As computer programming becomes more central to the workforce, the need for better models of how it is effectively learned has become more apparent. The current study addressed this gap by recording electrophysiological brain responses as 62 Python programmers with varying skill levels read lines of code with manipulations of form (syntax) and meaning (semantics). At the group level, results showed that manipulations of form resulted in P600 effects, with syntactically invalid code generating more positive deflections in the 500-800 ms range than syntactically valid code. Meaning manipulations resulted in N400 effects, with semantically implausible code generating more negative deflections in the 300-500 ms range than semantically plausible code. Greater Python expertise within the group was associated with greater sensitivity to violations in form. These results support the notion that skilled programming, like skilled natural language learning, is associated with the incorporation of rule-based knowledge into online comprehension processes. Conversely, programmers at all skill levels showed neural sensitivity to meaning manipulations, suggesting that reliance on pre-existing semantic relationships facilitates code comprehension across skill levels.

Indexed as

BrainProgramming LanguagesHumansLearning

Identifiers

PMID38443678
PMCPMC10914777

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.