MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

During Visual Word Recognition, Phonology Is Accessed within 100 ms and May Be Mediated by a Speech Production Code: Evidence from Magnetoencephalography: Figure 1.

2010· article· en· W2066164386 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Katherine L. Wheat, Piers L. Cornelissen, Stephen J. Frost, P. Hansen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentYork University
KeywordsPhonologyMagnetoencephalographyWord (group theory)PsychologySpeech recognitionCode (set theory)Speech productionLinguisticsComputer scienceNatural language processingNeuroscienceProgramming language

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Debate surrounds the precise cortical location and timing of access to phonological information during visual word recognition. Therefore, using whole-head magnetoencephalography (MEG), we investigated the spatiotemporal pattern of brain responses induced by a masked pseudohomophone priming task. Twenty healthy adults read target words that were preceded by one of three kinds of nonword prime: pseudohomophones (e.g., brein-BRAIN), where four of five letters are shared between prime and target, and the pronunciation is the same; matched orthographic controls (e.g., broin-BRAIN), where the same four of five letters are shared between prime and target but pronunciation differs; and unrelated controls (e.g., lopus-BRAIN), where neither letters nor pronunciation are shared between prime and target. All three priming conditions induced activation in the pars opercularis of the left inferior frontal gyrus (IFGpo) and the left precentral gyrus (PCG) within 100 ms of target word onset. However, for the critical comparison that reveals a processing difference specific to phonology, we found that the induced pseudohomophone priming response was significantly stronger than the orthographic priming response in left IFG/PCG at approximately 100 ms. This spatiotemporal concurrence demonstrates early phonological influences during visual word recognition and is consistent with phonological access being mediated by a speech production code.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.849
Threshold uncertainty score0.593

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations125
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NeuroscienceSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207