ArticleEvolutionary human sciences2025
Affixation patterns in native language and sequence processing by statistical learning mechanisms.
Article in Evolutionary human sciences, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The suffixing bias (the tendency to exploit suffixes more often than prefixes to express grammatical meanings) in world's languages was identified a century ago, yet we still lack a clear account for why it emerged, namely, whether the bias emerged because general cognitive mechanisms shape languages to be more easily processed by available cognitive machinery, or the bias is speech-specific and is determined by domain-specific mechanisms. We used statistical learning (SL) experiments to compare processing of suffixed and prefixed sequences on linguistic and non-linguistic material. SL is not speech-specific, and we observed the suffixing preference only on linguistic material, suggesting its language-specific origin. Moreover, morphological properties of native languages (existence of grammatical prefixes) modulate suffixing preferences in SL experiments only on linguistic material, suggesting limited cross-domain transfer.
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.