Planning units in Chinese handwriting: Comparing the role of radicals and logographemes.

IF 2.2 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition Pub Date : 2025-02-13 DOI:10.1037/xlm0001458
Jie Wang, Leqi Cheng, Ya-Ning Chang, Urs Maurer, Suiping Wang, Hsuan-Chih Chen
{"title":"Planning units in Chinese handwriting: Comparing the role of radicals and logographemes.","authors":"Jie Wang, Leqi Cheng, Ya-Ning Chang, Urs Maurer, Suiping Wang, Hsuan-Chih Chen","doi":"10.1037/xlm0001458","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present study investigated the word-form encoding process of handwriting in a nonalphabetic writing system, Chinese. The form-preparation paradigm (Experiment 1) and the picture-word interference paradigm (Experiment 2) were adopted to examine the facilitation effects of radical or logographeme overlap in Chinese handwritten production. Three different groups of Chinese writers were involved: Mainland Chinese participants who mainly used phonology-based Chinese input methods (Pinyin) for typewriting and the simplified Chinese script, Hong Kong participants who mainly used orthography-based input methods (e.g., Sucheng, Cangjie) and the traditional script, and Taiwanese participants who mainly used phonology-based input methods (Zhuyin) and the traditional script. The radical effects were consistently observed in the two paradigms across groups, indicating a prominent role of radicals in planning Chinese handwritten production. The Hong Kong participants showed a significantly larger radical effect than the Taiwanese participants, suggesting an influence of typewriting experience on the salience of radicals during Chinese handwriting. On the other hand, the logographeme effects were significant in the Mainland participants only and significantly smaller than the radical effects in the form-preparation paradigm and at 0-ms stimulus onset asynchrony in the picture-word interference paradigm. No significant difference was found between the radical and logographeme effects at -100- and 100-ms stimulus onset asynchrony, suggesting that the time courses of radical processing and logographeme processing are similar despite the lower salience of logographemes in planning Chinese handwritten production. Overall, these findings suggest that radicals and (nonradical) logographemes are processed at the same level of word-form encoding during Chinese handwritten production, but with different saliences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":50194,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0001458","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present study investigated the word-form encoding process of handwriting in a nonalphabetic writing system, Chinese. The form-preparation paradigm (Experiment 1) and the picture-word interference paradigm (Experiment 2) were adopted to examine the facilitation effects of radical or logographeme overlap in Chinese handwritten production. Three different groups of Chinese writers were involved: Mainland Chinese participants who mainly used phonology-based Chinese input methods (Pinyin) for typewriting and the simplified Chinese script, Hong Kong participants who mainly used orthography-based input methods (e.g., Sucheng, Cangjie) and the traditional script, and Taiwanese participants who mainly used phonology-based input methods (Zhuyin) and the traditional script. The radical effects were consistently observed in the two paradigms across groups, indicating a prominent role of radicals in planning Chinese handwritten production. The Hong Kong participants showed a significantly larger radical effect than the Taiwanese participants, suggesting an influence of typewriting experience on the salience of radicals during Chinese handwriting. On the other hand, the logographeme effects were significant in the Mainland participants only and significantly smaller than the radical effects in the form-preparation paradigm and at 0-ms stimulus onset asynchrony in the picture-word interference paradigm. No significant difference was found between the radical and logographeme effects at -100- and 100-ms stimulus onset asynchrony, suggesting that the time courses of radical processing and logographeme processing are similar despite the lower salience of logographemes in planning Chinese handwritten production. Overall, these findings suggest that radicals and (nonradical) logographemes are processed at the same level of word-form encoding during Chinese handwritten production, but with different saliences. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2025 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
3.80%
发文量
163
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition publishes studies on perception, control of action, perceptual aspects of language processing, and related cognitive processes.
期刊最新文献
Abstracting time in memory. True colors SNARC: Semantic number processing is highly automatic. The role of risk tolerance in navigation strategy decisions. A "logical intuition" based on semantic associations. Anchors and ratios to quantify and explain y-axis distortion effects in graphs.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1