Cited by 48Reading and Literacy DevelopmentNeurobiology of Language and BilingualismVisual perception and processing mechanisms

Development of neural specialization for print: evidence for predictive coding in visual word recognition

Open access
Zhao, Jing, Maurer, Urs, He, Sheng, Weng, Xuchu·2019·PLoS Biology

Abstract

How a child's brain develops specialization for print is poorly understood. One longstanding account is selective neuronal tuning to regularity of visual-orthographic features, which predicts a monotonically increased neural activation for inputs with higher regularity during development. However, we observed a robust interaction between a stimulus' orthographic regularity (bottom-up input) and children's lexical classification ability (top-down prediction): N1 response, which is the first negative component of the event-related potential (ERP) occurring at posterior electrodes, was stronger to lower-regularity stimuli, but only in children who were less efficient in lexically classifying these stimuli (high prediction error). In contrast, N1 responses were reduced to lower-regularity stimuli in children who showed high efficiency of lexical classification (low prediction error). The modulation of children's lexical classification efficiency on their neural responses to orthographic stimuli supports the predictive coding account of neural processes of reading.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1371/journal.pbio.3000474

Cites

62 of 63 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Similar results (reduced predictive performance) have been found in children with dyslexia.

    “Similar results have been found in previous literature in children with dyslexia (Beach et al., 2022; Zhao et al., 2019)”

    From Predictive coding in neuropsychiatric disorders: a systematic transdiagnostic review. (2025) · cites this paper as Zhao et al., 2019

    The Discussion suggests that neural deficits in dyslexia may reflect a lack of predictions from phonological language areas. But the Participants section says dyslexic children were excluded, so this paper did not find reduced predictive performance in children with dyslexia; it offers that explanation as a possibility. (LLM, conf=0.87)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [39]Modern Chinese Frequency Dictionary. Beijing Language Institute Press; 1985.
  2. [49]Zhao J, Li S, Lin S-E, Cao X-H, He S, Weng X-C. Selectivity of N170 in the left hemisphere as an electrophysiological marker for expertise in reading Chinese. Neurosci Bull. 2012; 28: 577– 84. 10.1007/s12264-012-1274-y 23054635 PMC5561926 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Zhao, J., Maurer, U., He, S., & Weng, X.
Affiliations
  • Hangzhou Normal University (CN)
  • Chinese University of Hong Kong (HK)
  • University of Minnesota (US)
  • South China Normal University (CN)
Corresponding author
Weng, Xuchu
Venue
PLoS Biology
Published
2019-10-10
Volume
17
Issue
10
Pages
e3000474
ISSN
  • 1544-9173 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-7885
OpenAlex
W2979866955
Cited by
48
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 3
FWCI
7.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • PLoS Biology (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • Greater South Information System
Funders
  • National Natural Science Foundation of China (31771229, 31371134)
  • Natural Science Foundation of Zhejiang Province (LY17C090008)
  • Project of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic China (2016YFE0130400, 2018YFC2001600)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Visual perception and processing mechanisms
Keywords
visual word recognition, predictive coding, orthographic regularity, lexical classification, N1 component, event-related potentials, children's reading development, top-down prediction, prediction error, neural tuning
MeSH terms
Child, Evoked Potentials, Female, Humans, Learning, Male, Pattern Recognition, Visual, Phonetics, Psychoacoustics, Reading, Asian People

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review