ArticleScientific reports2024
Tracking the brain signature of (mis)spelled logotypes via letter transpositions and replacements.
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 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Matter of Font: Visual Word Form Area Responses to Brand Names Are More Sensitive to Font Than to Letter Case Changes.Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.) · 2026Article
- How time shapes letter position flexibility: Testing positional uncertainty and open bigram accounts.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2025Article
- Misspelled-Word Reading Modulates Late Cortical Dynamics.Human brain mapping · 2025Article
- Dissociating the Effects of Visual Similarity for Brand Names and Common Words.Journal of cognition · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
All leading models of visual word recognition assume a hierarchical process that progressively converts the visual input into abstract letter and word representations. However, the results from recent behavioral studies suggest that the mental representations of words with a highly consistent visual format, such as logotypes, may comprise not only purely abstract information but also perceptual information. This hypothesis would explain why participants often misperceive transposed-letter misspellings with the original base words to a larger degree in logotypes (e.g., SASMUNG, but not SARVUNG, is perceived as SAMSUNG) than in common words. The present experiment examined the electrophysiological signature behind the identification of correctly spelled and misspelled logotypes (via letter transposition or replacement) in an ERP go/no-go semantic categorization experiment. Results showed that N400 amplitudes for transposed-letter misspelled logotypes (SASMUNG) and intact logotypes (SAMSUNG) did not differ significantly across various time windows (until 600 ms), whereas replacement-letter misspelled logotypes (SARVUNG) yielded consistently larger N400 amplitudes. These findings reveal that the mental representations of logotypes are particularly resistant to minor orthographic changes, which has important theoretical and applied (e.g., marketing) implications.
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.