Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38897450›Full record

ArticleNeuropsychologia2024

The primacy of experience in language processing: Semantic priming is driven primarily by experiential similarity.

Leonardo Fernandino, Lisa L Conant

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neuropsychologia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. A Common Representational Code for Event and Object Concepts in the Brain.The Journal of neuroscience : the official journal of the Society for Neuroscience · 2025
    Article
  3. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Leonardo FernandinoDepartment of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, USA; Department of Biomedical Engineering, Medical College of Wisconsin, USA. Electronic address: lfernandino@mcw.edu.
Lisa L ConantDepartment of Neurology, Medical College of Wisconsin, USA.

Funding

Concept Representation in the Human BrainR01DC016622 · NIDCD · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI BINDER, JEFFREY R · 2018 to 2022
$3.0M
Neural Representation of Lexical ConceptsR01DC020932 · NIDCD · MEDICAL COLLEGE OF WISCONSIN · PI Leonardo F Fernandino · 2024 to 2026
$1.2M
NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC016622NIDCD NIH HHS R01 DC020932
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The organization of semantic memory, including memory for word meanings, has long been a central question in cognitive science. Although there is general agreement that word meaning representations must make contact with sensory-motor and affective experiences in a non-arbitrary fashion, the nature of this relationship remains controversial. One prominent view proposes that word meanings are represented directly in terms of their experiential content (i.e., sensory-motor and affective representations). Opponents of this view argue that the representation of word meanings reflects primarily taxonomic structure, that is, their relationships to natural categories. In addition, the recent success of language models based on word co-occurrence (i.e., distributional) information in emulating human linguistic behavior has led to proposals that this kind of information may play an important role in the representation of lexical concepts. We used a semantic priming paradigm designed for representational similarity analysis (RSA) to quantitatively assess how well each of these theories explains the representational similarity pattern for a large set of words. Crucially, we used partial correlation RSA to account for intercorrelations between model predictions, which allowed us to assess, for the first time, the unique effect of each model. Semantic priming was driven primarily by experiential similarity between prime and target, with no evidence of an independent effect of distributional or taxonomic similarity. Furthermore, only the experiential models accounted for unique variance in priming after partialling out explicit similarity ratings. These results support experiential accounts of semantic representation and indicate that, despite their good performance at some linguistic tasks, the distributional models evaluated here do not encode the same kind of information used by the human semantic system.

Indexed as

SemanticsAdolescentAdultFemaleHumansLanguageMaleModels, PsychologicalPsycholinguisticsReaction TimeYoung AdultConcept representationDistributional semanticsLexical decisionLexical semanticsSemantic memory

Identifiers

PMID38897450
PMCPMC11326522

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.