“…Two-hundred and eighty-eight pseudowords were created as primes and assigned to each of three experimental conditions: (i) syllable-congruent condition (i.e., prime and target shared the first three letters and the syllable boundary e.g., ju.ral-JU.ROS, tur.ta-TUR.BO); (ii) syllable-incongruent condition (i.e., prime and target share the first three letters but not the syllable boundarye.g., jur.ga-JU.ROS, tu.res-TUR.BO); and (iii) unrelated condition (i.e., prime and target do not share either the first syllable or the same letters -e.g., po.car-JU.ROS and bin.va-TUR.BO). Additionally, a set of 96 pseudowords targets and a set of 288 pseudowords primes, following the same manipulation as the word targets, were created for the purposes of the lexical decision task, by replacing one or two letters in the medial positions of words with similar characteristics to those used in the experiment (e.g., for instance, the pseudoword VERVE was created by replacing the <m > in the EP word verme [maggot] with a <v>) following common practices in the literature (e.g., Perea et al, 2013;Soares et al, 2018Soares et al, , 2019aSoares et al, ,b, 2020Sze et al, 2014;Yap et al, 2010;Soares et al, 2021). These stimuli were distributed across three lists to counterbalance targets across the three prime conditions.…”