ArticleBehavior research methods2025
Cognition ratings for 8826 english words.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Distinguishing abstraction from abstractness: Specificity norms for 8,500 English words.Behavior research methods · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many abstract words refer to internal cognitive events or states, such as thinking or believing, or to cognitive products, such as theories, ideas, or whims (Binder et al., Cognitive Neuropsychology, 33, 130-174, 2016). Mental state information is proposed to be an important component in the grounding of abstract meaning (Kiefer et al., 2022, Muraki et al., 2022), such that our inner cognitive experiences form a foundational aspect of semantic representation. We tested this proposal by first collecting cognition ratings for over 8000 English words. Then, we used the norms generated from our ratings to examine the unique variance explained by cognition ratings in performance on lexical-semantic tasks. We found a significant effect of cognition, such that there was a facilitative relationship between cognition ratings and behavioral responses, even when controlling for other key lexical and semantic variables. Specifically, words rated as more cognitive in nature elicited faster and more accurate task responses, especially for words with more abstract meanings. This study highlights a novel behavioral effect that is consistent with a multidimensional account of semantic representation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40442530What 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.