Do the effects of subjective frequency and age of acquisition survive better word frequency norms?

被引:100
作者
Brysbaert, Marc [1 ]
Cortese, Michael J. [2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ghent, Dept Expt Psychol, B-9000 Ghent, Belgium
[2] Univ Nebraska, Omaha, NE 68182 USA
关键词
Word frequency; Familiarity; Age of acquisition; Word recognition; LEXICAL-DECISION; MONOSYLLABIC WORDS; RECOGNITION; ENGLISH; CONCRETENESS; FAMILIARITY; HYPOTHESIS; NETWORKS; FRANCIS; KUCERA;
D O I
10.1080/17470218.2010.503374
中图分类号
B84 [心理学];
学科分类号
010107 [宗教学];
摘要
Megastudies with processing efficiency measures for thousands of words allow researchers to assess the quality of the word features they are using. In this article, we analyse reading aloud and lexical decision reaction times and accuracy rates for 2,336 words to assess the influence of subjective frequency and age of acquisition on performance. Specifically, we compare newly presented word frequency measures with the existing frequency norms of Kucera and Francis (1967), HAL (Burgess Livesay, 1998), Brysbaert and New (2009), and Zeno, Ivens, Millard, and Duvvuri (1995). We show that the use of the Kucera and Francis word frequency measure accounts for much less variance than the other word frequencies, which leaves more variance to be oexplainedo by familiarity ratings and age-of-acquisition ratings. We argue that subjective frequency ratings are no longer needed if researchers have good objective word frequency counts. The effect of age of acquisition remains significant and has an effect size that is of practical relevance, although it is substantially smaller than that of the first phoneme in naming and the objective word frequency in lexical decision. Thus, our results suggest that models of word processing need to utilize these recently developed frequency estimates during training or setting baseline activation levels in the lexicon.
引用
收藏
页码:545 / 559
页数:15
相关论文
共 33 条
[1]
Modeling lexical decision: The form of frequency and diversity effects [J].
Adelman, James S. ;
Brown, Gordon D. A. .
PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 2008, 115 (01) :214-227
[2]
Judging the frequency of English words [J].
Alderson, J. Charles .
APPLIED LINGUISTICS, 2007, 28 (03) :383-409
[3]
[Anonymous], 1993, The CELEX Lexical Database (Release 1) CD-ROM
[4]
Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words [J].
Baayen, R. H. ;
Feldman, L. B. ;
Schreuder, R. .
JOURNAL OF MEMORY AND LANGUAGE, 2006, 55 (02) :290-313
[5]
Visual word recognition of single-syllable words [J].
Balota, DA ;
Cortese, MJ ;
Sergent-Marshall, SD ;
Spieler, DH ;
Yap, MJ .
JOURNAL OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY-GENERAL, 2004, 133 (02) :283-316
[6]
Subjective frequency estimates for 2,938 monosyllabic words [J].
Balota, DA ;
Pilotti, M ;
Cortese, MJ .
MEMORY & COGNITION, 2001, 29 (04) :639-647
[7]
The English Lexicon Project [J].
Balota, David A. ;
Yap, Melvin J. ;
Cortese, Michael J. ;
Hutchison, Keith A. ;
Kessler, Brett ;
Loftis, Bjorn ;
Neely, James H. ;
Nelson, Douglas L. ;
Simpson, Greg B. ;
Treiman, Rebecca .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2007, 39 (03) :445-459
[8]
Brants Thorsten., 2006, WEB IT 5 GRAM VERSIO
[9]
The effect of age of acquisition: Partly frequency related, partly frequency independent [J].
Brysbaert, Marc ;
Ghyselinck, Mandy .
VISUAL COGNITION, 2006, 13 (7-8) :992-1011
[10]
Moving beyond Kucera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English [J].
Brysbaert, Marc ;
New, Boris .
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS, 2009, 41 (04) :977-990