Task states dynamically modulate the Chinese N200 repetition enhancement effect: Evidence from the Bayesian Reader model

doi:10.3724/SP.J.1041.2026.2438

Abstract

Abstract: Whether task state shapes early orthographic processing during repeated Chinese word and character recognition beyond stimulus-driven feedforward processing remains unclear. Repetition elicits N200 repetition enhancement, which is a neural marker sensitive to early orthographic processing. Feedforward accounts predict that this effect depends primarily on the physical properties of repetition. By contrast, the Bayesian Reader Model predicts that processing depth is adjusted according to prior probability, task complexity, and interference. We examined whether N200 repetition enhancement reflects such task-state-driven tuning. Two electroencephalography experiments used a visual repetition priming paradigm. Both contrasted lexical-semantic access tasks, which required semantic access, with orthographic matching tasks based primarily on visual-form comparison. In Experiment 1, repetition probability and task type were manipulated using lexical decision and same-different judgment, respectively (N = 24). Experiment 2 used semantic and same-different judgment while manipulating interference through orthographically similar characters and holding visual repetition probability constant (N = 24). In Experiment 1, task type significantly modulated N200 repetition enhancement, which was stronger during lexical-semantic access than during orthographic matching. The effect of repetition probability was task dependent. High repetition probability eliminated N200 repetition enhancement during orthographic matching but not during lexical-semantic access. In Experiment 2, both high- and low-interference conditions elicited significant N200 repetition enhancement during orthographic matching, a pattern that differed from the absence of enhancement under high repetition probability in Experiment 1. However, enhancement magnitude did not differ significantly between the two interference levels. Across both experiments, N400 effects displayed the reverse task pattern, with larger effects during orthographic matching than during lexical-semantic access. Together, the results indicate that N200 repetition enhancement varies across task complexity, prior probability, and interference contexts. The cross-experiment difference further suggests that visual repetition probability alone may not fully account for the observed pattern. From the perspective of the Bayesian Reader Model, the findings provide electrophysiological evidence for task-state-driven tuning of early orthographic processing in Chinese recognition. The independent contribution of interference should nevertheless be tested in a unified experimental design.

Key words: Bayesian Reader Model, N200 repetition enhancement, task state, Chinese character recognition, event-related potential

CLC Number:

B842

HU Saisai, FU Zeqing, ZHOU Aibao, YIN Yulong. (2026). Task states dynamically modulate the Chinese N200 repetition enhancement effect: Evidence from the Bayesian Reader model. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 58(12), 2438-2455.

References

[1] Barron, R. W., & Pittenger, J. B. (1974). The effect of orthographic structure and lexical meaning on "same-different" judgments.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 26(4), 566-581.
[2] Bolger D. J., Perfetti C. A., & Schneider W. (2005). Cross‐cultural effect on the brain revisited: Universal structures plus writing system variation.Human Brain Mapping, 25(1), 92-104.
[3] Dehaene S., Cohen L., Sigman M., & Vinckier F. (2005). The neural code for written words: A proposal.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 9(7), 335-341.
[4] Delorme, A., & Makeig, S. (2004). EEGLAB: An open source toolbox for analysis of single-trial EEG dynamics including independent component analysis.Journal of Neuroscience Methods, 134(1), 9-21.
[5] den Ouden H. E., Kok P., & de Lange, F. P. (2012). How prediction errors shape perception, attention, and motivation.Frontiers in Psychology, 3, e548.
[6] Du Y., Hu W., Fang Z., & Zhang J. X. (2013). Electrophysiological correlates of morphological processing in Chinese compound word recognition.Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, 7, e601.
[7] Du Y., Zhang Q., & Zhang J. X. (2014). Does N200 reflect semantic processing?—An ERP study on Chinese visual word recognition.PLoS ONE, 9(3), e90794.
[8] Duñabeitia J. A., Kinoshita S., Carreiras M., & Norris D. (2011). Is morpho-orthographic decomposition purely orthographic? Evidence from masked priming in the same-different task.Language and Cognitive Processes, 26(4-6), 509-529.
[9] Feldman, L. B., & Siok, W. W. T. (1999). Semantic radicals contribute to the visual identification of Chinese characters.Journal of Memory and Language, 40(4), 559-576.
[10] Grill-Spector K., Henson R., & Martin A. (2006). Repetition and the brain: Neural models of stimulus-specific effects.Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(1), 14-23.
[11] Gu L., Li H., Qu J., Yang J., Fu X., Hu R., & Mei L. (2026). Functional specialization of the visual word form area during word reading: A multimodal neuroimaging study. Neurobiology of Language, 7, NOL.a.225.
[12] Hu W., Zhang B., Jia X., Chen H., Yuan J., Fang Z., & Zhang J. X. (2025). The centro-parietal N200: A neural marker for orthographical processing in visual Chinese one-character word recognition.Acta Psychologica Sinica, 57(7), 1127-1138.
[13] Kinoshita, S., & Norris, D. (2012). Task-dependent masked priming effects in visual word recognition.Frontiers in Psychology, 3, e178.
[14] Kutas, M., & Federmeier, K. D. (2011). Thirty years and counting: Finding meaning in the N400 component of the event-related brain potential (ERP).Annual Review of Psychology, 62, 621-647.
[15] Lau E. F., Phillips C., & Poeppel D. (2008). A cortical network for semantics: (de)constructing the N400.Nature Reviews Neuroscience, 9(12), 920-933.
[16] Li, C., & Kovács, G. (2022). Repetition probability effects for Chinese characters and German words in the visual word form area.Brain Research, 1780, e147812.
[17] Liu, Y. (1990). Frequency dictionary of commonly used modern Chinese words. Yuhang Press.
[18] Marelli M., Amenta S., Morone E. A., & Crepaldi D. (2013). Meaning is in the beholder's eye: Morpho-semantic effects in masked priming.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 20(3), 534-541.
[19] Norris, D. (2006). The Bayesian reader: Explaining word recognition as an optimal Bayesian decision process.Psychological Review, 113(2), 327-357.
[20] Norris, D., & Kinoshita, S. (2012). Reading through a noisy channel: Why there's nothing special about the perception of orthography.Psychological Review, 119(3), 517-545.
[21] Perfetti C. A., Liu Y., & Tan L. H. (2005). The lexical constituency model: Some implications of research on Chinese for general theories of reading.Psychological Review, 112(1), 43-59.
[22] Perfetti, C. A., & Tan, L. H. (1998). The time course of graphic, phonological, and semantic activation in Chinese character identification.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 24(1), 101-118.
[23] Rao, R. P., & Ballard, D. H. (1999). Predictive coding in the visual cortex: A functional interpretation of some extra-classical receptive-field effects.Nature Neuroscience, 2(1), 79-87.
[24] Rayner K., Pollatsek A., Ashby J., & Charles, C. J. (2012). Psychology of reading. Psychology Press.
[25] Silva-Pereyra J., Harmony T., Villanueva G., Fernandez T., Rodriguez M., Galan L., … Reyes A. (1999). N400 and lexical decisions: Automatic or controlled processing? Clinical Neurophysiology, 110(5), 813-824.
[26] Song B., Sommer W., & Maurer U. (2024). Expectation modulates repetition suppression at late but not early stages during visual word recognition: Evidence from event-related potentials.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 36(5), 872-887.
[27] Summerfield C., Trittschuh E. H., Monti J. M., Mesulam M. M., & Egner T. (2008). Neural repetition suppression reflects fulfilled perceptual expectations.Nature Neuroscience, 11(9), 1004-1006.
[28] Tan L. H., Spinks J. A., Eden G. F., Perfetti C. A., & Siok W. T. (2005). Reading depends on writing, in Chinese.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 102(24), 8781-8785.
[29] Vinckier F., Dehaene S., Jobert A., Dubus J. P., Sigman M., & Cohen L. (2007). Hierarchical coding of letter strings in the ventral stream: Dissecting the inner organization of the visual word-form system.Neuron, 55(1), 143-156.
[30] Wang, F., & Maurer, U. (2020). Interaction of top-down category-level expectation and bottom-up sensory input in early stages of visual-orthographic processing.Neuropsychologia, 137, e107299.
[31] Wiggs, C. L., & Martin, A. (1998). Properties and mechanisms of perceptual priming.Current Opinion in Neurobiology, 8(2), 227-233.
[32] Yin Y., Cai X., Ouyang M., & Zhang Q. (2020). The N200 enhancement effect in reading Chinese is modulated by actual writing.Neuropsychologia, 142, e107462.
[33] Yin, Y., & Zhang, Q. (2021). Chinese characters are read using not only visual but also writing motor information.Psychophysiology, 58(1), e13696.
[34] Zhang J. X., Fang Z., Du Y., Kong L., Zhang Q., & Xing Q. (2012). Centro-parietal N200: An event-related potential component specific to Chinese visual word recognition.Chinese Science Bulletin, 57(13), 1516-1532.
[35] Zhang J. X., Zhang B., Jia X., Chen H., Yuan J., Fang Z., & Fan W. (2013). The centro-parietal N200 is the neural marker for the orthographic recognition of Chinese characters.Sciencepaper Online.
[36] Zhou A., Yin Y., Zhang J., & Zhang R. (2016). Does font type influence the N200 enhancement effect in Chinese word recognition? Journal of Neurolinguistics, 39, 57-68.