Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42446854›Full record

ArticleMemory & cognition2026

Extracting prototypes from lexical feature norms for settlement concepts.

Chelsea-Leigh M McKenzie, John Paul Minda

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Memory & cognition, 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

2 authors.

Chelsea-Leigh M McKenzieDepartment of Psychology, Western University, London, ON, N6A 3K7, Canada. cmcken7@uwo.ca.ORCID http://orcid.org/0009-0000-2192-8471
John Paul MindaDepartment of Psychology, Western University, London, ON, N6A 3K7, Canada. jpminda@uwo.ca.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4081-010X

Funding

SSHRC Explore Grant R3507A20
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The present study explored whether people share a common understanding of different settlement concepts despite individual variation. Participants completed a property listing task where they were asked to generate features for 57 settlement concepts (e.g., "city," "college town"). We used hierarchical cluster analysis to identify distinct clusters based on shared features. Central tendencies extracted from the clusters at different levels of abstraction revealed featural prototypes and an overall family resemblance structure. To probe the effects of regional context on conceptual structure, we used a subset of participants who were long-term residents of Canada or the USA. We found that prototypical features varied regionally, suggesting an effect of participants' geographical region on conceptual structure. This work is the first to investigate how people represent settlements as concepts and helps centralize the utility of semantic feature norms in understanding how people collectively think about where they live, and the importance of context effects on representations of settlements.

Indexed as

ConceptsFamily resemblancePrototypesSemantic memorySettlements

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.