ArticleMemory & cognition2025
Text and picture integration during bridging information processing: A comparison of English and Chinese L1 and L2 speakers.
Article in Memory & cognition, 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
Bridging information facilitates comprehension in both textual and pictorial stories, but its effects when both types of information are present remain unclear. This study examines how bridging information and individual differences influence comprehension across texts and pictures. Participants read four-segment stories under six conditions: 1) picture-original (pictorial stories), 2) picture-to-text-switch (pictorial stories with textual bridging information), 3) picture-missing (pictorial stories without bridging information), 4) text-original (textual stories), (5) text-to-picture-switch (textual stories with pictorial bridging information), and (6) text-missing (textual stories without bridging information). L1 and L2 Chinese and English speakers participated. Missing conditions led to longer comprehension times across all groups, confirming the facilitative role of bridging information. Crucially, the picture-to-text switch caused no disruption, and Chinese L1 speakers were unaffected by the text-to-picture switch, suggesting that bridging information can be processed during text and picture integration without extra cognitive resources. However, English L1 and L2 speakers, as well as Chinese L2 speakers, showed increased comprehension times in the text-to-picture switch condition, indicating greater processing difficulty for alphabetic and L2 texts. Robust effects of individual differences were also revealed.
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.