ArticlePsychonomic bulletin & review2025
Are the early stages of orthographic processing universal? Insights from masked priming with Semitic words.
Article in Psychonomic bulletin & review, 2025. 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.
- Open-bigrams as orthographic processing units in Arabic: Evidence from the flanking-letters lexical-decision task.Attention, perception & psychophysics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Two views contend to account for the processes at play during the early stages of visual word recognition. The first holds that these stages are not modulated by the idiosyncratic properties of different languages. The second maintains that the structural properties of the language determine the weighting of the different domains of linguistic knowledge (e.g., orthographic and morphological domains may be differentially weighted across languages). To explore this question, we focused on orthographic priming in Arabic. In this Semitic language, lexical representations are claimed to be based on morphological similarity, with little or no role for orthographic similarity. We conducted two masked priming experiments using the yes-no and go/no-go versions of the lexical decision task to determine if Arabic target words (e.g., مدير 'mudyr', director) are facilitated by nonword primes that are orthographically but not morphologically related (i.e., pairs share neither a root nor a word pattern; e.g.,ماير 'maAyr') relative to unrelated primes. Results showed faster responses for the orthographically related target words than for the unrelated target words in the two experiments. These findings favor the view that the early phases of visual word processing in Semitic and Indo-European languages are fundamentally the same.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39302500What 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.