ArticleBilingualism (Cambridge, England)2025
Semantic processing of iconic signs is not automatic: Neural evidence from hearing non-signers.
Article in Bilingualism (Cambridge, England), 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.
- The neural response to highly iconic signs in hearing learners and deaf signers.Brain and language · 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
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Iconicity facilitates learning signs, but it is unknown whether recognition of meaning from the sign form occurs automatically. We recorded ERPs to highly iconic (transparent) and non-iconic ASL signs presented to one group who knew they would be taught signs (learners) and another group with no such expectations (non-learners). Participants watched sign videos and detected an occasional grooming gesture (no semantic processing required). Before sign onset, learners showed a greater frontal negativity compared to non-learners for both sign types, possibly due to greater motivation to attend to signs. During the N400 window, learners showed greater negativity to iconic than non-iconic signs, indicating more semantic processing for iconic signs. The non-learners showed a later and much weaker iconicity effect. The groups did not differ in task performance or in P3 amplitude. We conclude that comprehending the form-meaning mapping of highly iconic signs is not automatic and requires motivation and attention.
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.