standOff, and the article is at its publisher via the link below. When we have changed our mind. Some entries in the table begin with a word in capitals and the reason for it. EVIDENCE CORRECTED — the finding still stands, but we had quoted the wrong sentence from the paper, and the quotation has been replaced with the right one. RETRACTED — the entry itself was wrong; it stays on the page, marked, with the reason, rather than being deleted. WITHDRAWN AND REPLACED — the entry was wrong, and a corrected version of it appears in the entries below. Each mark carries its own reason, in brackets, because the reasons differ from one entry to the next. An entry we have WITHDRAWN is removed from this page and kept in the record, with its reason. A line reading Audit and a date is a later re-reading of the entry against its whole sentence: DOUBTFUL means it was kept, and the reason says what is loose about it. Quotation marks inside the tagger's sentence. Where a tag is the tagger's own sentence, a phrase in quotation marks inside it is borrowed from the paper — the tagger's wording around it is not. The paper's own sentence is the evidence quote for that row; on this page it is withheld with the article, and the article is at its publisher. Nothing inside quotation marks anywhere on this page is ours: if it is quoted, it is the paper's. Whose words a concept carries. A concept entry records a term the paper itself uses, so the term, the sense given for it, and its evidence are the paper's own words, quoted where the paper fixes them. This is the opposite of a sense entry in the tag table, which is the tagger's sentence about how the paper uses a term. Where a concept entry could not be grounded in the paper's words, the entry says so on its own row.| relation to other work | claim_relations | how this paper stands to another: agrees, contradicts, extends, qualifies |
| claim type | claim_type | the shape of the claim: existence, mechanism, method, critique, prediction, null |
| concept edge | concept_edges | an asserted relation between two concepts, with the sentence asserting it |
| concept | concepts | an idea the paper works with, quoted where the paper uses it |
| content tag | content_tags | a finding, definition, quantity, statistic or variable named in the paper |
| control | controls | an experiment run to eliminate a rival explanation |
| limitation | limitations | what the paper says its evidence cannot support |
| mechanism | mechanisms | how the reported effect is said to come about |
| method | method | how the paper produced its evidence |
| phenomenon | phenomenon | the effect or regularity under study |
| sense | senses | a distinct use of a term, quoted where the paper fixes it |
Relations on this page carry a quotation for the claim. Where a relation was separately evidenced — and so tested against the vocabulary for its type — the row says so; none of 3 relations here carry that mark. The rest are the tagger’s reading of the sentence quoted beside them.
| facet | tag | field | conf. | whose words |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| claim_type | existence Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_type | the paper's words | |
| phenomenon | masked repetition priming of pictures Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | phenomenon | the paper's words | |
| method | electrophysiology Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: electrophysiology | method | the paper's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[0] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[1] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[2] | the tagger's words | |
| mechanisms | mechanisms Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | mechanisms[3] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | Object symmetry was not controlled, so the surviving early mirror effect may be an artefact of symmetric items. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | The early mirror-reflection priming effect may reflect global shape overlap rather than internal object features. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| limitations | No N300 effect was obtained in any condition, possibly because the rapid presentation rate merged it with the N400. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | limitations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| controls | twelve counterbalanced lists, so each repeated and unrepeated object appears an equal number of times across participants while appearing in only one condition for any single participant Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. eliminates: item effects - that a difference between repeated and unrepeated objects is a property of which objects happened to fall in which condition · outcome (stated by the tagger, no quotation): held | controls[0] | 0.85 | the tagger's words |
| concepts | invariance Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: invariance | concepts[0] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | masked repetition priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: masked repetition priming | concepts[1] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | N190/P190 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: N190/P190 | concepts[2] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | N400 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: N400 | concepts[3] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | mirror reflection Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mirror reflection | concepts[4] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| concepts | object recognition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: object recognition | concepts[5] | 0.95 | the paper's words |
| senses | PRIMING IS THE INSTRUMENT AND INVARIANCE IS THE SUBJECT, stated in the abstract's first sentence: `Quotation withheld` Whether priming SURVIVES a transformation is the measurement of whether the representation is invariant to it - so the experiment is about object representation, and priming is the apparatus. The pickering2008 distinction in a third literature, after Argiris2021 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | NECESSARY, ALTHOUGH NOT ALWAYS SUFFICIENT - an explicit logical qualifier, which is rare enough in this corpus to be worth a row of its own. `overlapping perceptual information between the prime and target is necessary, although not always sufficient, to activate a higher level semantic representation.` Necessity and the denial of sufficiency in one clause, and the design earns both halves separately: the mirror condition gives early overlap WITHOUT the later effect (not sufficient), and the size-mirror condition removes the early effect and the later one with it (necessary). The record's mechanisms[0] paraphrases only the necessity half Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | THE LATE STAGE IS MORE INVARIANT THAN THE EARLY ONE, which is the opposite of the obvious ordering. `The N400 unlike the N190/P190 appears to be FULLY invariant to size, since the repetition effect for the small prime condition DID NOT DIFFER from the repetition effect for the identity priming condition` - a null stated with its statistical basis attached. The early perceptual effect survives the same manipulation but pays for it: it `compensates for differences in size, but not without a small processing cost`. So invariance is not a property a representation has or lacks; it is graded, and it is cheaper further up Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| senses | THE ERP CASCADE TURNS `IS IT INVARIANT?` INTO `WHEN DOES IT STOP BEING INVARIANT?` The conclusion says exactly this: the results `help elucidate the time course of previous fMRI findings of size invariance in adaptation paradigms and also when during object processing left-right arrangement of objects becomes important for activating an object representation.` fMRI adaptation can say a region is invariant; a component sequence can say at which stage the invariance ends. That is the methodological reason this paper exists, and it is a claim about what its instrument can resolve rather than about objects Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | senses[3] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| claim_relations | contradicts → Fiser and Biederman (2001) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[0] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | extends → Chauncey et al. (2008) masked size-priming study with words Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[1] | the tagger's words | |
| claim_relations | builds-on → Eddy et al. (2006) masked repetition priming of pictures Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | claim_relations[2] | the tagger's words | |
| concept_edges | invariance —operationalised-as→ masked repetition priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. strength of the relation: 0.95 · note: The instrument relation, and the paper's own first sentence states it: invariance is examined THROUGH a masked repetition priming paradigm. Weighted 0.95 because this is a statement of what the experiment does, not an inference from its results.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span says invariance was examined through ERPs in a masked repetition priming paradigm; operationalised-as is loose. also in: invariance · masked repetition priming | concept_edges[0] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | N190/P190 —contrasted-with→ N400 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. differs in: WHICH TRANSFORMATION EACH TOLERATES. Both survive a halving of the prime; only the early one survives mirror reflection of the target. The two manipulations are therefore indistinguishable at the perceptual stage and separate at the semantic one, which is how the paper locates where left-right arrangement starts to matter · strength of the relation: 0.9 · note: THE PAPER'S CORE DISSOCIATION, and the span carries both arms of it so a reader cannot take half. Grounded on the abstract's result sentence rather than the discussion because this is the one place both components and both transformations appear together. | concept_edges[1] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| concept_edges | mirror reflection —causes→ N400 Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. direction on the measure: reduces · strength of the relation: 0.85 · note: 'reduces' AND NOT 'eliminates', WHICH IS A CALL AND IT WENT AGAINST THE OBVIOUS READING. The result sentence says 'no significant N400 effect was observed' and the record's existing content_tags.findings[6] says the effect was 'eliminated ... altogether' - but the discussion's own verb for the same result is ATTENUATE, and a non-significant effect is not a demonstrated zero. The paper's weaker word is the one inside the quote. Weight 0.85 and 'appears to be' left in for the same reason.
Audit 2026-09-28: DOUBTFUL - read against its full span and kept, but the span says mirror reflection APPEARS to be enough to attenuate the N400; hedged. also in: mirror reflection · N400 | concept_edges[2] | 0.95 | the tagger's words |
| content_tags | repeated-measures ANOVA Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: repeated-measures ANOVA | content_tags.statistics[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Greenhouse-Geisser correction Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Greenhouse-Geisser correction | content_tags.statistics[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | effect size (partial eta squared) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: effect size (partial eta squared) | content_tags.statistics[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | t-test Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: t-test | content_tags.statistics[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | d-prime (signal detection sensitivity) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.statistics[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | mean Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mean | content_tags.statistics[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | standard deviation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: standard deviation | content_tags.statistics[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Masked repetition priming of pictures produced early (N190/P190) and late (N400) ERP effects that were invariant to size, while only the early effect was invariant to mirror reflection. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Combining a small prime with a mirror-reflected target produced no significant priming effects. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Even in the earliest window, the small-prime-plus-mirror condition produced no reliable repetition effect (F<3, p>0.065). Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | No significant N300 repetition effect appeared in any condition. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The N400 was fully size-invariant: the small-prime repetition effect was statistically indistinguishable from the identity repetition effect. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The early N190/P190 compensated for differences in size, but with a small processing cost. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Mirror-reflecting the target eliminated the N400 repetition effect altogether. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | The failure of priming in the combined small-prime/mirror-target condition is attributable to the mirror reflection rather than to the prime size, since small primes alone still primed and mirror targets alone did not. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Target d' averaged 4.45 and 4.75, significantly above the prime items' d' in both prime-size conditions. Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.findings[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | identity condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: identity condition | content_tags.definitions[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | size condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: size condition | content_tags.definitions[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | mirror condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mirror condition | content_tags.definitions[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | size-mirror condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: size-mirror condition | content_tags.definitions[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | repetition priming Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: repetition priming | content_tags.definitions[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | N190/P190 component Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: N190/P190 component | content_tags.definitions[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | N400 component Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: N400 component | content_tags.definitions[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | adaptation Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: adaptation | content_tags.definitions[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | prime size Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: prime size | content_tags.variables[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | mirror reflection of the target Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: mirror reflection of the target | content_tags.variables[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | repetition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: repetition | content_tags.variables[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | Mean amplitude Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: Mean amplitude | content_tags.variables[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | electrode site Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: electrode site | content_tags.variables[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | counterbalanced lists Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: counterbalanced lists | content_tags.variables[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | stimulus onset-asynchrony Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: stimulus onset-asynchrony | content_tags.variables[8] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | inter-trial interval Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. also in: inter-trial interval | content_tags.variables[9] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | n = 24 — participants, undergraduates with a mean age of 19.6 years Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[0] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 620 — colour photographs of common objects used as stimuli, each 256 x 256 pixels Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[1] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 390 — trials viewed per subject, each a unique prime-target pair Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[2] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 110 ms — prime-target stimulus onset asynchrony held constant across conditions Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[3] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 1.81 — d' for detecting a normal-size food prime (1.71 for a small food prime), indicating primes were not identifiable Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[4] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | 4.45 — d' for food items in the target position after a normal-size filler prime (4.75 after a small prime) Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[5] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | approximately 15% — trials discarded for blinks, eye movements or muscle artifact before averaging Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[6] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | F(1,23) = 11.295, p = 0.003, η p 2 = 0.329 — midline main effect of repetition for the identity condition in the N400 window Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[7] | the tagger's words | |
| content_tags | F<3, p > 0.065 — non-significant repetition effect in the early window for the small-prime/mirror-target condition Quotation withheld — this record is not cleared for redistribution. The sentence is in the paper at the link above. | content_tags.quantities[8] | the tagger's words |
Tags that could not be placed in the text:
What was deliberately not tagged, and why, is recorded per paper by the tagger. Where a paper has no such record, this page says so rather than implying that nothing was declined.