{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.020134228187919462, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.989583333333333, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
On the relation between conceptual priming, neural priming, and novelty assessment.

A consistently reported finding in functional neuroimaging studies which compare processing of new information to processing of old information is a reduction in blood flow, and hence neural activity, associated with the old condition. This deactivation has been labeled neural priming. Some investigators have hypothesized that neural priming is the physiological mechanism underlying conceptual priming--a facilitation in the semantic processing of repeated information. Others, however, have hypothesized that neural priming reflects novelty assessment--a mechanism which minimizes the probability that redundant information will be stored in long-term memory. In this paper, the conceptual priming and novelty assessment hypotheses are compared and contrasted in order to ask, and tentatively answer, the question: Are conceptual priming and novelty assessment cognitively and neurophysiologically distinct? Based on a review of the literature, it is suggested that whereas novelty assessment and conceptual priming are distinct cognitive entities, they cannot be presently separated neurophysiologically. That is, some novelty assessment deactivations may in fact reflect priming, and some priming deactivations may in fact reflect novelty assessment.