ArticleNeuropsychologia2024
An ERP investigation of perceptual vs motoric iconicity in sign production.
Article in Neuropsychologia, 2024. 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.
- The Neural Network for Sign Language Comprehension.Language and linguistics compassArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The type of form-meaning mapping for iconic signs can vary. For perceptually-iconic signs there is a correspondence between visual features of a referent (e.g., the beak of a bird) and the form of the sign (e.g., extended thumb and index finger at the mouth for the American Sign Language (ASL) sign BIRD). For motorically-iconic signs there is a correspondence between how an object is held/manipulated and the form of the sign (e.g., the ASL sign FLUTE depicts how a flute is played). Previous studies have found that iconic signs are retrieved faster in picture-naming tasks, but type of iconicity has not been manipulated. We conducted an ERP study in which deaf signers and a control group of English speakers named pictures that targeted perceptually-iconic, motorically-iconic, or non-iconic ASL signs. For signers (unlike the control group), naming latencies varied by iconicity type: perceptually-iconic < motorically-iconic < non-iconic signs. A reduction in the N400 amplitude was only found for the perceptually-iconic signs, compared to both non-iconic and motorically-iconic signs. No modulations of N400 amplitudes were observed for the control group. We suggest that this pattern of results arises because pictures eliciting perceptually-iconic signs can more effectively prime lexical access due to greater alignment between features of the picture and the semantic and phonological features of the sign. We speculate that naming latencies are facilitated for motorically-iconic signs due to later processes (e.g., faster phonological encoding via cascading activation from semantic features). Overall, the results indicate that type of iconicity plays role in sign production when elicited by picture-naming tasks.
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.