ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2026
Processing of Orthographic Representations in Transparent Orthography: Evidence from Masked Priming.
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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The present study investigated visual word recognition in a transparent orthography by examining the effects of lexicality, word frequency, word length, prime duration, and task conditions in a masked priming paradigm. Using Bosnian as a model of transparent orthography, 100 adults completed inclusion and exclusion stem-completion tasks with prime durations of 0 ms, 50 ms, and 250 ms. A robust lexicality effect was observed, with real words producing higher accuracy than pseudowords and nonwords. Longer stimuli yielded lower accuracy and slower responses, whereas frequency effects emerged primarily in accuracy and varied across prime durations. High-frequency words showed an advantage at the 50-ms SOA that was reduced at the 250-ms SOA. Inclusion and exclusion conditions produced different patterns of accuracy and reaction times, highlighting the contribution of both automatic and controlled processes to visual word recognition. Furthermore, lexicality effects, and frequency effects on accuracy, varied as a function of the time available for prime processing. The findings support models proposing parallel contributions of lexical and sublexical processing mechanisms in reading. Consistent with dual-route models and the psycholinguistic grain size theory, familiar lexical items benefited from lexical activation, whereas longer and less familiar stimuli placed greater demands on sublexical decoding processes. More broadly, the results suggest that reading in transparent orthographies reflects dynamic interactions between lexical activation, orthographic structure, and processing time rather than relying solely on grapheme-phoneme decoding. These findings contribute to theoretical accounts of word recognition and have implications for literacy instruction and reading development in transparent writing systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42726339What 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.