SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English

Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology

Volumn 67, Issue 6, 2014, Pages 1176-1190

  van Heuven, Walter J B ^a   Mandera, Pawel ^b   Keuleers, Emmanuel ^b   Brysbaert, Marc ^b,c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF NOTTINGHAM   (United Kingdom)

^b GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

^c SWANSEA UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Visual word recognition; Word frequency; Zipf scale

Indexed keywords

DECISION MAKING; FACTUAL DATABASE; HUMAN; LANGUAGE; LINGUISTICS; PHYSIOLOGY; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION; STATISTICS; STATISTICS AND NUMERICAL DATA; UNITED KINGDOM;

DATABASES, FACTUAL; DECISION MAKING; GREAT BRITAIN; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; REACTION TIME; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); STATISTICS AS TOPIC; VOCABULARY;

EID: 84901405333     PISSN: 17470218     EISSN: 17470226     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/17470218.2013.850521     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Adelman, J. S., & Brown, G. D. (2008). Modeling lexical decision: The form of frequency and diversity effects. Psychological Review, 115(1), 214-227. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.115.1.214
2. Adelman, J. S., Brown, G. D. A., & Quesada, J. F. (2006). Contextual diversity, not word frequency, determines word naming and lexical decision times. Psychological Science, 17, 814-823. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2006.01787.x
3. Arnon, I., & Snider, N. (2010). More than words: Frequency effects for multi-word phrases. Journal of Memory and Language, 62(1), 67-82. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2009.09.005
4. Baayen, R. H., Milin, P., Filipovic Durdevic, D., Hendrix, P., & Marelli, M. (2011). An amorphous model for morphological processing in visual comprehension based on naive discriminative learning. Psychological Review, 118, 438-481. doi: 10.1037/a0023851
5. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, Linguistic Data Consortium.
6. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., Treiman, R. (2007). The English Lexicon project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445-459. doi: 10.3758/BF03193014
7. Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The word frequency effect: A review of recent developments and implications for the choice of frequency estimates in German. Experimental Psychology, 58, 412-424. doi: 10.1027/1618-3169/a000123
8. Brysbaert, M., & Cortese, M. J. (2011). Do the effects of subjective frequency and age of acquisition survive better word frequency norms? Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 545-559. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2010.503374
9. Brysbaert, M., & Diependaele, K. (2013). Dealing with zero word frequencies: A review of the existing rules of thumb and a suggestion for an evidence-based choice. Behavior Research Methods, 45, 422-430. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0270-5
10. Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., & New, B. (2011). Assessing the usefulness of google books' word frequencies for psycholinguistic research on word processing. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 27. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00027
11. Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). 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. Behavior Research Methods, 41, 977-990. doi: 10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
12. Brysbaert, M., New, B., & Keuleers, E. (2012). Adding part-of-speech information to the SUBTLEX-US word frequencies. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 991-997. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0190-4
13. Cai, Q., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). SUBTLEX-CH: Chinese word and character frequencies based on film subtitles. PLOS ONE, 5, e10729. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0010729
14. Children's Printed Word Database. Database of printed word frequencies as read by children aged between 5 & 9. Retrieved May 21, 2013, from http://www.essex.ac.uk/psychology/cpwd/
15. Cuetos, F., Glez-Nosti, M., Barbon, A., & Brysbaert, M. (2011). SUBTLEX-ESP: Spanish word frequencies based on film subtitles. Psicologica, 32, 133-143.
16. Dimitropoulou, M., Duñabeitia, J. A., Avilés, A., Corral, J., & Carreiras, M. (2010). Subtitle-based word frequencies as the best estimate of reading behavior: The case of Greek. Frontiers in Psychology, 1(218), 1-12.
17. Ferrand, L., New, B., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., Bonin, P., Meot, A., Pallier, C. (2010). The french lexicon project: Lexical decision data for 38,840 french words and 38,840 pseudowords. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 488-496. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.2.488
18. Garside, R., & Smith, N. (1997). A hybrid grammatical tagger: CLAWS4. In R. Garside, G. Leech, & A. McEnery (Eds.), Corpus annotation: Linguistic information from computer text corpora (pp. 102-121). London: Longman
19. Government United Kingdom (1988). Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. Retrieved from http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/48/contents
20. Keuleers, E., Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2010). SUBTLEX-NL: A new frequency measure for Dutch words based on film subtitles. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 643-650. doi: 10.3758/BRM.42.3.643
21. Keuleers, E., Lacey, P., Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). The British Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 28,730 monosyllabic and disyllabic English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 287-304. doi: 10.3758/s13428-011-0118-4
22. Kilgarriff, A. (2006). BNC database and word frequency lists. Retrieved May 13, 2013, from http://www.kilgarriff.co.uk/bnc-readme.html
23. Kučera, H., & Francis, W. (1967). Computational analysis of present-day American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.
24. Kuperman, V., & Bertram, R. (2013). Moving spaces: Spelling alternation in english noun-noun compounds. Language and Cognitive Processes, 28, 939-966.
25. Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30 thousand english words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 978-990. doi: 10.3758/s13428-012-0210-4
26. Lancaster University Centre for Computer Corpus Research on Language (n.d.). CLAWS part-of-speech tagger for English. Retrieved May 17, 2013, from http://ucrel.lancs.ac.uk/claws/
27. Lété, B., & Bonin, P. (2013). Does frequency trajectory influence word identification? A cross-task comparison. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66(5), 973-1000. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.723725
28. Masterson, J., Stuart, M., Dixon, M., & Lovejoy, S. (2010). Children's printed word database: Continuities and changes over time in children's early reading vocabulary. British Journal of Psychology, 101(2), 221-242. doi: 10.1348/000712608X371744
29. Minnen, G., Carroll, J., & Pearce, D. (2001). Applied morphological processing of English. Natural Language Engineering, 7(3), 207-223. doi: 10.1017/S1351324901002728
30. Monsell, S., Doyle, M. C., & Haggard, P. N. (1989). Effects of frequency on visual word recognition tasks - Where are they? Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 43-71. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.118.1.43
31. Morrison, C. M., & Ellis, A. W. (1995). Roles of word frequency and age of acquisition in word naming and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(1), 116-133. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.21.1.116
32. New, B., Brysbaert, M., Veronis, J., & Pallier, C. (2007). The use of film subtitles to estimate word frequencies. Applied Psycholinguistics, 28, 661-677. doi: 10.1017/S014271640707035X
33. Perea, M., Soares, A. P., & Comesaña, M. (2013). Contextual diversity is a main determinant of word identification times in young readers. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 116, 37-44. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.10.014
34. Siyanova-Chanturia, A., Conklin, K., & van Heuven, W. J. B. (2011). Seeing a phrase "time and again" matters: The role of phrasal frequency in the processing of multiword sequences. Journal of Experimental Psychology-Learning Memory and Cognition, 37(3), 776-784. doi: 10.1037/a0022531
35. Steiger, J. H. (1980). Tests for comparing elements of a correlation matrix. Psychological Bulletin, 87, 245-251. doi: 10.1037/0033-2909.87.2.245
36. The Stanford Natural Language Processing Group (n.d.). Stanford Log-linear Part-Of-Speech Tagger. Retrieved May 17, 2013, from http://nlp.stanford.edu/downloads/tagger.shtml
37. Toutanova, K., Klein, D., Manning, C. D., & Singer, Y. (2003). Feature-rich part-of-speech tagging with a cyclic dependency network. In Proceedings of the 2003 conference of the North American chapter of the association for computational linguistics on human language technology-volume 1 (pp. 173-180). Association for Computational Linguistics.
38. Yap, M. J., Tan, S. E., Pexman, P. M., & Hargreaves, I. S. (2011). Is more always better? Effects of semantic richness on lexical decision, speeded pronunciation, and semantic classification. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 18(4), 742-750. doi: 10.3758/s13423-011-0092-y
39. Zipf, G. K. (1949). Human behavior and the principle of least effort. Cambridge, MA: Addison-Wesley.