Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41184384›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2025

Lexical priming of space depends on how deeply you think about it.

Samuel Shaki, Oria Pitem, Martin H Fischer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 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.

Samuel ShakiDepartment of Psychology, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel. Samuel_shaki@hotmail.com.
Oria PitemDepartment of Psychology, Ariel University, Ariel, Israel.
Martin H FischerPotsdam Embodied Cognition Group, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany.

Funding

DFG 1915/12-1ISF 1398/24
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a long debate about how the meaning of words cues our spatial attention. For implicitly spatial words such as "ROOF" or "BASEMENT", it was recently shown that processing both the cue word and a subsequent spatial target stimulus was necessary for spatial congruity effects to emerge. Here we challenge this work by documenting that word cues alone suffice to induce congruity effects if they are processed deeply. Sixty-three healthy adults detected vertically displaced targets after looking at centrally presented cue words under three counterbalanced instructions, imposing increasing processing depth: Lexical decision, non-spatial categorization, and spatial categorization. Target detection speed revealed spatial congruity effects for both spatial and non-spatial categorization but not for lexical decision. An interpretation in terms of covert attention deployment was corroborated by concomitant vertical displacements of eye gaze. Our results reveal minimal requirements for covert and overt semantic cueing of spatial attention.

Indexed as

AttentionSpace PerceptionAdultCuesFemaleHumansMaleReaction TimeSemanticsYoung AdultAttention shiftLevels of processingLinguistic cueingSemantic attention

Identifiers

PMID41184384
PMCPMC12583767

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.