ArticleThe European journal of neuroscience2025
Discrete Repetition Effects for Visual Words Compared to Faces and Animals, but No Modulation by Expectation: An Event-Related Potential Study.
Article in The European journal of neuroscience, 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Repetition suppression (RS) refers to the reduction of neuronal responses to repeated stimuli as compared to nonrepeated stimuli. The predictive coding account of RS proposes that its magnitude is modulated by repetition probability (P(rep)) and that this modulation increases with prior experience with the stimulus category. To test these proposals, we examined RS and its modulation by P(rep) for three stimulus categories for which participants had different expertise (Asian faces, written Chinese words and animals) using EEG. Cantonese speakers watched paired stimuli (S1-S2) of a given category with S2 being the same or a different stimulus as S1. Attributes of S1 (e.g., the sex of the first face) served as a cue for the repetition probability of S2. There were significant repetition effects and distinct topographic distributions across stimulus categories. Repetition effects in the N250 component were present in all stimulus categories, but in words, they appeared earlier and showed distinct topographic patterns compared to faces and animals. These results suggest that repetition effects differ between stimulus categories, presumably depending on prior experience and stimulus properties, such as spatial frequency. Importantly, we failed to find evidence for effects of P(rep) across any of the three categories. These null findings of P(rep) effects are putatively indicating an absence of expectancy modulation of repetition effects.
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.