Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38446237›Full record

ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2024

The Effect of Syntactic Similarity on Intra-Sentential Switching Costs: Evidence from Chinese-English Bilinguals.

Fan Su, Xue-Yi Huang, Xin Chang

Erratum issuedAbstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.3field-weighted citation impact, top 47% of its field
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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Fan SuSchool of Foreign Languages, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China.
Xue-Yi HuangSchool of Foreign Languages, Shanghai Jiaotong University, Shanghai, 200400, China.
Xin ChangSchool of Foreign Languages, Tongji University, Shanghai, 200092, China. changxinwp@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-7114-0620
Tongji University · CNShanghai Jiao Tong University · CN

Funding

National Social Science Fund of China 23FYYB047
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In order to better understand the role of syntactic similarity in a code-switched sentence, the current study explored the effect of similar and different syntactic structures on Chinese-English bilinguals' intra-sentential switching costs. L2 proficiency and switching directions as factors that potentially intervene in bilingual performance were together explored to see if there was any interaction. We manipulated the degree of syntactic similarity by utilizing clauses in active voice (greater similarity) and passive voice (lesser similarity). The study conducted a self-paced reading paradigm as a more natural language reading processing. Results showed overall longer reading times for active sentences than passive counterparts, which supported a syntactic similarity impediment rather than facilitation. The impediment seemed to be predominant irrespective of L2 proficiency. Furthermore, syntactic similarity modulated the asymmetry of switching costs between forward (L1-L2) and backward (L2-L1) direction: word RTs for the 1st and the 2nd switched word yielded greater costs in L2-L1 condition, while greater costs in L1-L2 condition was observed in 3rd switched word RTs and average RTs. The present study observed syntactic similarity impediment rather than facilitation for Chinese-English bilinguals. Notably, syntactic similarity plays a predominant role compared to L2 proficiency, and modulates the asymmetry between switching directions.

Indexed as

Asian PeopleLanguageChinaHumansNatural Language ProcessingChinese-English bilingualsIntra-sentential code-switchingSelf-paced readingSyntactic similarity

Identifiers

PMID38446237
OpenAlexW4392511360

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.