The impact of word prevalence on lexical decision times: Evidence from the Dutch lexicon project 2

Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance

Volumn 42, Issue 3, 2016, Pages 441-458

  Brysbaert, Marc ^a   Stevens, Michaël ^a   Mandera, Paweł ^a   Keuleers, Emmanuel ^a  

^a GHENT UNIVERSITY   (Belgium)

Author keywords

Lexical decision; Megastudies; Word prevalence; Word recognition

Indexed keywords

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMAN; LINGUISTICS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PREVALENCE; REACTION TIME; READING; RECOGNITION; SEMANTICS; YOUNG ADULT;

ADOLESCENT; ADULT; AGED; DECISION MAKING; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; NETHERLANDS; PREVALENCE; PSYCHOLINGUISTICS; REACTION TIME; READING; RECOGNITION (PSYCHOLOGY); SEMANTICS; VOCABULARY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84958903324     PISSN: 00961523     EISSN: 19391277     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1037/xhp0000159     Document Type: Article

References (85)

1. Adelman, J. S., Sabatos-DeVito, M. G., Marquis, S. J., & Estes, Z. (2014). Individual differences in reading aloud: A mega-study, item effects, and some models. Cognitive Psychology, 68, 113-160. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2013.11.001
2. Anderson, R. C., & Nagy, W. E. (1993). The vocabulary conundrum. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign: Tech. Rep. No. No 570 from the Center for the Study of Reading Retrieved from https://www.ideals.illinois.edu/bitstream/handle/2142/18019/ctrstreadtechrepv01993i00570_opt.pdf
3. Andrews, S. (1997). The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 4, 439-461. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03214334
4. Baayen, R. H., Feldman, L. B., & Schreuder, R. (2006). Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words. Journal of Memory and Language, 55, 290-313. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2006.03.008
5. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., & Yap, M. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 283-316. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.283
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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193014
7. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., & Cortese, M. J. (2012). Megastudies: What do millions (or so) of trials tell us about lexical processing? In J. S. Adelman (Ed.), Visual word recognition (pp. 90-115). Hove, UK: Psychology Press.
8. Barsalou, L. W., Santos, A., Simmons, W. K., & Wilson, C. D. (2008). Language and simulation in conceptual processing. In M. De Vega, A. M. Glenberg, & A. Graesser (Eds.), Symbols, embodiment, and meaning (pp. 245-283). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199217274.003.0013
9. Borovsky, A., Elman, J. L., & Kutas, M. (2012). Once is enough: N400 indexes semantic integration of novel word meanings from a single exposure in context. Language Learning and Development, 8, 278-302. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/15475441.2011.614893
10. Bowers, J. S., Davis, C. J., & Hanley, D. A. (2005). Interfering neighbours: The impact of novel word learning on the identification of visually similar words. Cognition, 97, B45-B54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.02.002
11. Boyd, D., & Crawford, K. (2012). Critical questions for big data: Provocations for a cultural, technological, and scholarly phenomenon. Information Communication and Society, 15, 662-679. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2012.678878
12. Breton, J., & Robertson, E. M. (2014). Flipping the switch: Mechanisms that regulate memory consolidation. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 18, 629-634. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.tics.2014.08.005
13. Brysbaert, M. (2013). LEXTALE_FR: A fast, free, and efficient test to measure language proficiency in French. Psychologica Belgica, 53, 23-37. http://dx.doi.org/10.5334/pb-53-1-23
14. Brysbaert, M., & Cortese, M. J. (2011). Do the effects of subjective frequency and age of acquisition survive better word frequency norms? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 545-559. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.503374
15. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0270-5
16. Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., & Mandera, P. (2014). A plea for more interactions between psycholinguistics and natural language processing research. Computational Linguistics in the Netherlands Journal, 4. Retrieved from http://www.clinjournal.org/sites/default/files/14-Brysbaertetal-CLIN2014.pdf
17. Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009). Moving beyond Kučera 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.41.4.977
18. Brysbaert, M., & Rastle, K. (2013). Historical and conceptual issues in psychology (2nd ed.). Harlow, UK: Pearson Education.
19. Brysbaert, M., Stevens, M., De Deyne, S., Voorspoels, W., & Storms, G. (2014). Norms of age of acquisition and concreteness for 30,000 Dutch words. Acta Psychologica, 150, 80-84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2014.04.010
20. Brysbaert, M., Van Wijnendaele, I., & De Deyne, S. (2000). Age-ofacquisition effects in semantic processing tasks. Acta Psychologica, 104, 215-226. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00021-4
21. Brysbaert, M., Warriner, A. B., & Kuperman, V. (2014). Concreteness ratings for 40 thousand generally known English word lemmas. Behavior Research Methods, 46, 904-911. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-013-0403-5
22. Cambria, E., & White, B. (2014). Jumping NLP curves: A review of natural language processing research. IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine, 9, 48-57. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/MCI.2014.2307227
23. Catling, J., Dent, K., Preece, E., & Johnston, R. (2013). Age-of-acquisition effects in novel picture naming: A laboratory analogue. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 1756-1763. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.764903
24. Chetail, F., Balota, D., Treiman, R., & Content, A. (2015). What can megastudies tell us about the orthographic structure of English words? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1519-1540. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.963628
25. Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 33, 497-505. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14640748108400805
26. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., & Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud. Psychological Review, 108, 204-256. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.108.1.204
27. Cortese, M. J., Hacker, S., Schock, J., & Santo, J. B. (2015). Is readingaloud performance in megastudies systematically influenced by the list context? The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1711-1722. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.974624
28. Cortese, M. J., McCarty, D. P., & Schock, J. (2015). A mega recognition memory study of 2897 disyllabic words. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1489-1501. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.945096
29. Cortese, M. J., & Schock, J. (2013). Imageability and age of acquisition effects in disyllabic word recognition. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 66, 946-972. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2012.722660
30. Coutanche, M. N., & Thompson-Schill, S. L. (2014). Fast mapping rapidly integrates information into existing memory networks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 2296-2303. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/xge0000020
31. Ellis, A. W., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2000). Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: Insights from connectionist networks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 26, 1103-1123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.26.5.1103
32. Ernestus, M., & Cutler, A. (2015). BALDEY: A database of auditory lexical decisions. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1469-1488. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.984730
33. Ferrand, L., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., New, B., Bonin, P., Méot, A.,.. Pallier, C. (2011). Comparing word processing times in naming, lexical decision, and progressive demasking: Evidence from chronolex. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 306. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00306
34. Ferrand, L., New, B., Brysbaert, M., Keuleers, E., Bonin, P., Méot, 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.2.488
35. Fischer, S., & Born, J. (2009). Anticipated reward enhances offline learning during sleep. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 35, 1586-1593. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0017256
36. Forster, K. I. (2000). The potential for experimenter bias effects in word recognition experiments. Memory & Cognition, 28, 1109-1115. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03211812
37. Francis, G. (2012). Publication bias and the failure of replication in experimental psychology. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19, 975-991. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0322-y
38. Gernsbacher, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 113, 256-281. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0096-3445.113.2.256
39. Goodman, J. C., Dale, P. S., & Li, P. (2008). Does frequency count? Parental input and the acquisition of vocabulary. Journal of Child Language, 35, 515-531. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0305000907008641
40. Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model. Psychological Review, 103, 518-565. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.103.3.518
41. Harm, M. W., & Seidenberg, M. S. (2004). Computing the meanings of words in reading: Cooperative division of labor between visual and phonological processes. Psychological Review, 111, 662-720. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.111.3.662
42. Hawkins, E., Astle, D. E., & Rastle, K. (2015). Semantic advantage for learning new phonological form representations. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 27, 775-786. http://dx.doi.org/10.1162/jocn_a_00730
43. Hayes, D. P. (1988). Speaking and writing: Distinct patterns of word choice. Journal of Memory and Language, 27, 572-585.
44. Howe, D., Costanzo, M., Fey, P., Gojobori, T., Hannick, L., Hide, W.,.. Rhee, S. Y. (2008). Big data: The future of biocuration. Nature, 455, 47-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/455047a
45. Hubert, M., & Vandervieren, E. (2008). An adjusted boxplot for skewed distributions. Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, 52, 5186-5201. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.csda.2007.11.008
46. Juhasz, B. J., Yap, M. J., Dicke, J., Taylor, S. C., & Gullick, M. M. (2011). Tangible words are recognized faster: The grounding of meaning in sensory and perceptual systems. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 1683-1691. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.605150
47. Kang, S. H. K., Yap, M. J., Tse, C.-S., & Kurby, C. A. (2011). Semantic size does not matter: "bigger" words are not recognized faster. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 1041-1047. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2011.575947
48. Keuleers, E. (2015). Package "vwr:" Useful functions for visual word recognition research. Retrieved from http://cran.r-project.org/web/packages/vwr/vwr.pdf
49. Keuleers, E., & Balota, D. A. (2015). Megastudies, crowdsourcing, and large datasets in psycholinguistics: An overview of recent developments. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1457-1468. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1051065
50. Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator. Behavior Research Methods, 42, 627-633. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.627
51. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BRM.42.3.643
52. Keuleers, E., Diependaele, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2010). Practice effects in large-scale visual word recognition studies: A lexical decision study on 14,000 Dutch mono- and disyllabic words and nonwords. Frontiers in Psychology, 1, 174. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2010.00174
53. 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. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0118-4
54. Keuleers, E., Stevens, M., Mandera, P., & Brysbaert, M. (2015). Word knowledge in the crowd: Measuring vocabulary size and word prevalence in a massive online experiment. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1665-1692. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2015.1022560
55. Kousta, S. T., Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Andrews, M., & Del Campo, E. (2011). The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 140, 14-34. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0021446
56. Kühberger, A., Fritz, A., & Scherndl, T. (2014). Publication bias in psychology: A diagnosis based on the correlation between effect size and sample size. PLoS ONE, 9, e105825. http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0105825
57. Kuperman, V. (2015). Virtual experiments in megastudies: A case study of language and emotion. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 68, 1693-1710. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.989865
58. Kuperman, V., Estes, Z., Brysbaert, M., & Warriner, A. B. (2014). Emotion and language: Valence and arousal affect word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 143, 1065-1081. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0035669
59. Kuperman, V., Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Brysbaert, M. (2012). Age-ofacquisition ratings for 30,000 English words. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 978-990. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-012-0210-4
60. Kuperman, V., & Van Dyke, J. A. (2013). Reassessing word frequency as a determinant of word recognition for skilled and unskilled readers. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 39, 802-823. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0030859
61. Lemhöfer, K., & Broersma, M. (2012). Introducing LexTALE: A quick and valid Lexical Test for Advanced Learners of English. Behavior Research Methods, 44, 325-343. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/s13428-011-0146-0
62. Lemhöfer, K., Dijkstra, T., Schriefers, H., Baayen, R. H., Grainger, J., & Zwitserlood, P. (2008). Native language influences on word recognition in a second language: A megastudy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 34, 12-31. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.34.1.12
63. McGraw, K. O., & Wong, S. P. (1996). Forming Inferences about some Intraclass Correlation Coefficients. Psychological Methods, 1, 30-46. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/1082-989X.1.1.30
64. Merkx, M., Rastle, K., & Davis, M. H. (2011). The acquisition of morphological knowledge investigated through artificial language learning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 64, 1200-1220. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2010.538211
65. Monaghan, P., & Ellis, A. W. (2010). Modeling reading development: Cumulative, incremental learning in a computational model of word naming. Journal of Memory and Language, 63, 506-525. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2010.08.003
66. New, B., Ferrand, L., Pallier, C., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 13, 45-52. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03193811
67. Nusbaum, H. C., Pisoni, D. B., & Davis, C. K. (1984). Sizing up the Hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20,000 words. Indiana University: Research on speech perception progress report no. 10.
68. Open Science Collaboration. (2015). Estimating the reproducibility of psychological science. Science, 349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.aac4716
69. Popper, K. R. (1934). Logik der Forschung [Logic of research]. Vienna, Austria: Springer.
70. Popper, K. R. (1963). Conjectures and fefutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. London, UK: Routledge & Keegan Paul.
71. Seidenberg, M. S., & McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. Psychological Review, 96, 523-568. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.96.4.523
72. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.86.2.420
73. Simmons, J. P., Nelson, L. D., & Simonsohn, U. (2011). False-positive psychology: Undisclosed flexibility in data collection and analysis allows presenting anything as significant. Psychological Science, 22, 1359-1366. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0956797611417632
74. Spieler, D. H., & Balota, D. A. (1997). Bringing computational models of word naming down to the item level. Psychological Science, 8, 411-416. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1997.tb00453.x
75. Stevens, M., Lammertyn, J., Verbruggen, F., & Vandierendonck, A. (2006). Tscope: A C library for programming cognitive experiments on the MS windows platform. Behavior Research Methods, 38, 280-286. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/BF03192779
76. Steyvers, M., & Tenenbaum, J. B. (2005). The large-scale structure of semantic networks: Statistical analyses and a model of semantic growth. Cognitive Science, 29, 41-78. http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15516709cog2901_3
77. Taylor, J. S. H., Duff, F. J., Woollams, A. M., Monaghan, P., & Ricketts, J. (2015). How word meaning influences word reading. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 24, 322-328. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0963721415574980
78. Tinkham, T. (1997). The effects of semantic and thematic clustering on the learning of second language vocabulary. Second Language Research, 13, 138-163. http://dx.doi.org/10.1191/026765897672376469
79. van Heuven, W. J. B., Mandera, P., Keuleers, E., & Brysbaert, M. (2014). SUBTLEX-UK: A new and improved word frequency database for British English. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1176-1190. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2013.850521
80. van Kesteren, M. T., Beul, S. F., Takashima, A., Henson, R. N., Ruiter, D. J., & Fernández, G. (2013). Differential roles for medial prefrontal and medial temporal cortices in schema-dependent encoding: From congruent to incongruent. Neuropsychologia, 51, 2352-2359. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2013.05.027
81. Vankov, I., Bowers, J., & Munafò, M. R. (2014). On the persistence of low power in psychological science. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 67, 1037-1040. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17470218.2014.885986
82. Ward, N. (1998). Artificial intelligence and other approaches to speech understanding: Reflection on methodology. Journal of Experimental & Theoretical Artificial Intelligence, 10, 487-493. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/095281398146716
83. Wu, X., Zhu, X., Wu, G. Q., & Ding, W. (2014). Data mining with big data. Knowledge and Data Engineering. IEEE Transactions, 26, 97-107.
84. Yap, M. J., & Balota, D. A. (2009). Visual word recognition of multisyllabic words. Journal of Memory and Language, 60, 502-529. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2009.02.001
85. Yarkoni, T., Balota, D., & Yap, M. (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart's N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 971-979. http://dx.doi.org/10.3758/PBR.15.5.971