ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2026
Effect of Gender-fair Writing on Lexical Access in French.
Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2026. 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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In gender-marked languages like French, the use of gender-fair forms such as the middle dot (e.g., étudiant·e [student]) is promoted for inclusivity but criticized for impairing readability. Grounded in the dual-route model of reading, this study provides the first empirical test of the middle dot’s impact on French lexical access. Participants performed a lexical decision task with words and pseudowords presented either in gendered form or in middle-dot form. We analyzed reaction times using linear mixed-effects models controlling for stimulus length. For real words, our analysis revealed a persistent processing cost: reaction times were significantly slower for middle-dot forms compared to gendered forms across both blocks of the task, indicating no short-term habituation to this disruption of the lexical route. In contrast, the significant processing cost associated with pseudowords in the first block completely disappeared in the second block. This suggests the rapid development of a strategic shortcut of the non-lexical route. A complementary analysis of accuracy revealed a main effect of writing form, with significantly lower accuracy for middle-dot items overall, further indicating increased processing difficulty for middle-dot forms. These effects were not modulated by participants’ opinion on gender-fair writing. Future eye-tracking studies using more ecological reading paradigms are needed to clarify these visual processing strategies and determine whether gender-fair markers are fully integrated semantically during reading.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41779211What 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.