Claims

The SR-related brain-activation pattern occurs only in readers highly familiar with Harry Potter; low-familiarity readers show no significant differences

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · causal r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims

Reading the evidence codes

q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.

This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.

q3 i? There was a significant interaction between Scenario Type and HP familiarity at the left MFG, with the high-familiarity group showing higher activation for SR than RR and for SR than SF, and the low-familiarity group showing no significant differences. → Xiaodong Xu 2025

Evidence

Xiaodong Xu 2025

Xiaodong Xu, Cheng Jia, Kang Chen & Lijuan Chen. (2025). Unveiling the neural mechanisms of supernatural fiction comprehension using fNIRS. npj Science of Learning. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-025-00327-0

q3 · i? · causal · r2

Follow-up emmeans analysis of the significant Scenario Type × HP familiarity interaction at left MFG [CH1: χ2 = 15.2, df = 2, pFDR < 0.001] in the 61-participant fNIRS experiment, comparing the high- (n = 30) and low-familiarity (n = 31) groups.

"the high-familiarity group showed significantly higher activation during the reading of SR compared to RR [ t(118) = 3.99, β = 0.884, pFDR < 0.001] and higher activation during the reading of SR compared to SF [t(118) = 3.85, β = 0.852, pFDR < 0.001]. In contrast, the low-familiarity group did not exhibit significant activation differences in any comparisons."

Discussion

Page metadata
Field Value
status review
generated by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-27
trust unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content

Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.