Hemispheric asymmetries for accessing the phonological representation of single printed words.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The differential abilities of the cerebral hemispheres to access the phonological representation of printed words was investigated using a visual half-field paradigm in which participants performed a lexical decision task for target words primed by semantic associates (e.g., TOAD-FROG), homophones of words semantically associated to target words (e.g., TOWED-FROG), and unrelated control words (e.g., FINK-FROG, PLASM-FROG). At a short stimulus onset asynchrony (165 ms), significant priming was obtained for both semantic and homophonic associates regardless of visual field of presentation, although the effects were much less robust for the left visual field/right hemisphere. Thus, both hemispheres seem to initially have access to the semantic and phonological representations of printed words, but with the degree of activation being less in the right hemisphere. These results replicate those of previous studies indicating that both hemispheres initially have access to the phonological representations of printed words and are discussed in terms of the model of the hemispheres proposed by Chiarello (2003).Dept. of Psychology. Paper copy at Leddy Library: Theses & Major Papers - Basement, West Bldg. / Call Number: Thesis2005 .D66. Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 44-03, page: 1512. Thesis (M.A.)--University of Windsor (Canada), 2005.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".