ArticleFrontiers in psychology2026
Cross-linguistic phonological activation in Chinese- English-Korean trilinguals.
Article in Frontiers in psychology, 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
This study investigates whether phonological similarity alone can drive cross-linguistic activation across non-native languages in trilingual lexical processing. Using a masked priming lexical decision task, we examined phonological priming from English (L2) to Korean (L3) in Chinese-English-Korean unbalanced trilinguals. Critically, homophone pairs were employed to minimize semantic and orthographic overlap, allowing for a clearer examination of phonological priming than previous studies relying on cognates. The results showed a robust phonological priming effect between non-native languages, suggesting that phonological information alone can trigger cross-linguistic activation. In addition, proficiency was treated as a continuous variable, with L2 and L3 proficiency showing dissociable effects: higher L3 proficiency facilitated lexical access, whereas higher L2 proficiency was associated with slower response times, suggesting increased cross-language competition. Overall, the present study demonstrates that phonological representations are shared between non-native languages, supporting non-selective cross-linguistic activation in trilingual lexical processing, and highlights the important role of proficiency in lexical processing. These findings are discussed within the framework of bilingual and trilingual models of lexical access and provide further insights into the development of more refined models of trilingual lexical processing.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.