ArticlePsychophysiology2025
Fine-Grained Concreteness Effects on Word Processing and Representation Across Three Tasks: An ERP Study.
Article in Psychophysiology, 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
People process concrete words more quickly and accurately than abstract ones-the so-called "concreteness effect." This advantage also reflects differences in how the brain processes and stores concrete versus abstract words. In this electrophysiological study, we treated word concreteness as a continuous variable and examined its effects on ERPs across three tasks with distinct processing demands (semantic, affective, grammatical). Behavioral results revealed task-dependent concreteness effects: in the semantic task, reaction times were faster for words at both concreteness extremes, and the classical linear advantage emerged for concrete words. Mass univariate ERP analyses revealed distinct spatiotemporal patterns of task-dependent concreteness effects. In the semantic task, we identified three significant clusters reflecting increased parietal N2/P3-like and sustained bilateral fronto-temporal negativity ERPs and decreased central N400-like ERP for abstract words. By contrast, the affective task elicited an increased parietal P600-like ERP for abstract words. Moreover, results from multivariate representational similarity analysis and an intersection analysis revealed that concreteness is encoded in ERP spatiotemporal patterns from 450 ms onwards, regardless of task, suggesting its role not only as an organizational principle in semantic representation, but also as a factor influencing downstream word processing and univariate ERP concreteness effects. Our findings challenge and extend existing theories like the dual coding and context availability ones, highlighting the importance of treating concreteness as a continuous variable and considering task context in word processing studies. This approach, enabled by advanced analytical techniques, provides a more nuanced understanding of how the brain processes and represents words.
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.