Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42199524›Full record

ArticleNeurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.)2026

The Nature of a Writing System Shapes the Cognitive and Neural Mechanisms for Reading Acquisition.

J S H Taylor, Adam Jowett, Tibor Auer, Cheng-Yu Hsieh, Angelika Lingnau, Kathleen Rastle

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Neurobiology of language (Cambridge, Mass.), 2026. 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

6 authors.

J S H TaylorDivision of Psychology and Language Sciences, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1109-8539
Adam JowettDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK.
Tibor AuerAdvanced Research Computing Centre, University College London, London, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5153-1424
Cheng-Yu HsiehDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2826-1435
Angelika LingnauFaculty of Human Science, University of Regensburg, Regensburg, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8620-3009
Kathleen RastleDepartment of Psychology, Royal Holloway, University of London, Egham, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3070-7555

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Writing systems are cultural inventions that differ in how they represent spoken language. We tested how the brain learns to map arbitrary visual symbols to sound and meaning by comparing neural activity for artificial writing systems that were either alphabetic (systematic symbol-sound mappings) or logographic (arbitrary symbol-sound mappings). Twenty-four adults learned to read aloud and comprehend novel words written in each system. After 2 weeks of training, functional magnetic resonance imaging during reading comprehension revealed that the dorsal pathway (inferior parietal gyrus, inferior frontal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-sound, was more active for the alphabetic system, whereas the ventral pathway (anterior fusiform gyrus, middle temporal gyrus), which is involved in mapping from print-to-meaning, was more active for the logographic system. Combined with performance differences, these findings indicate that systematic symbol-sound mappings allowed the brain to bridge the interface between vision and meaning via sound, whereas an absence of systematicity made it more efficient to link vision directly to meaning. Thus, the same brain finds different solutions to the problem of reading that capitalise on the statistical properties of culturally invented writing systems.

Indexed as

artificial orthographyneuroimagingreading acquisitionreading developmentstatistical regularities

Identifiers

PMID42199524
PMCPMC13200069

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.