Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40172676›Full record

ArticlePsychological research2025

Processing of onomatopoeia by hearing-reduced students in sentence context: a study based on ERPs.

Jinhe Han, Shuhua Su, Qiaoyun Liu

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Psychological research, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jinhe HanDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0009-9295-463X
Shuhua SuDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0008-1511-1359
Qiaoyun LiuDepartment of Rehabilitation Sciences, East China Normal University, Shanghai, China. qyliu@spe.ecnu.edu.cn.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2014-9537

Funding

the Guangdong Provincial Key Laboratory of Development and Education for Children with Special Needs TJ202015
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Onomatopoeia plays a crucial role in the early language development of individuals, serving as one of the primary language symbols acquired at an early stage. It functions as a bridge, connecting external sounds with the language system. In this study, event-related potential technology was employed alongside a lexical decision task within sentence structures, introducing phonological and orthographic variables. The main objective was to explore the impact of sentence context on onomatopoeia processing among hearing-reduced (HR) students. The results showed that the accuracy of HR students was significantly lower than typical-hearing (TH) students. With sentence context, the P200 response to phonological similarity was significantly larger than the response to orthographic similarity in HR students, and the P200 response to orthographic similarity under sentence context conditions was smaller in HR students than in TH students. Compared to TH students, graphical similarity evoked a higher P200 in HR students. Moreover, the N400 in the contextless condition was lower than in the contextual condition in TH students. The findings revealed that sentence context can have an impact on the acquisition of meaning for onomatopoeic words, as well as the processing of their phonology and orthography, but the effect on HR students and TH students was different.

Indexed as

Evoked PotentialsHearing LossLanguage DevelopmentPsycholinguisticsSpeech PerceptionAdolescentAdultElectroencephalographyFemaleHumansMaleStudentsYoung Adult

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.