Imageability and age of acquisition (AoA) effects, as well as key interactions between these variables and frequency and consistency, were examined via multiple regression analyses for 1,936 disyllabic words, using reaction time and accuracy measures from the English Lexicon Project. Both imageability and AoA accounted for unique variance in lexical decision and naming reaction time performance. In addition, across both tasks, AoA and imageability effects were larger for low-frequency words than high-frequency words, and imageability effects were larger for later acquired than earlier acquired words. In reading aloud, consistency effects in reaction time were larger for later acquired words than earlier acquired words, but consistency did not interact with imageability in the reaction time analysis. These results provide further evidence that multisyllabic word recognition is similar to monosyllabic word recognition and indicate that AoA and imageability are valid predictors of word recognition performance. In addition, the results indicate that meaning exerts a larger influence in the reading aloud of multisyllabic words than monosyllabic words. Finally, parallel-distributed-processing approaches provide a useful theoretical framework to explain the main effects and interactions.
Following the studies by Cortese, Khanna, and Hacker (2010) on recognition memory for monosyllabic words, recognition memory estimates (e.g., hits, false alarms, hits minus false alarms) for 3000 disyllabic words were obtained from 120 subjects and 2897 of these words were analysed via multiple regression. Participants studied 30 lists of 50 words and were tested on 30 lists of 100 words. Of the subjects, 60 received a constant study time of 2000 ms per item and 60 studied items at their own pace. Specific predictor variables included log word frequency, word length, imageability, age of acquisition, orthographic similarity, and phonological similarity. The results were similar to those of Cortese et al. (2010). Specifically, in the analysis of hits minus false alarms, the entire set of predictor variables accounted for 34.9% of the variance. All predictor variables except phonological similarity were related to performance, with imageability, length, orthographic similarity and frequency all being strong predictors. These results are mostly compatible with the predictions made by single- and dual-process theories. However, across items hit rates were not correlated with false alarms. Given that most variables produced the standard mirror pattern, this latter outcome poses a major challenge for recognition memory theories.
We provide imageability estimates for 3,000 disyllabic words (as supplementary materials that may be downloaded with the article from www.springerlink.com ). Imageability is a widely studied lexical variable believed to influence semantic and memory processes (see, e.g., Paivio, 1971). In addition, imageability influences basic word recognition processes (Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg, & Patterson, 1996). In fact, neuroimaging studies have suggested that reading high- and low-imageable words elicits distinct neural activation patterns for the two types e.g., Bedny & Thompson-Schill (Brain and Language 98:127-139, 2006; Graves, Binder, Desai, Conant, & Seidenberg NeuroImage 53:638-646, 2010). Despite the usefulness of this variable, imageability estimates have not been available for large sets of words. Furthermore, recent megastudies of word processing e.g., Balota et al. (Behavior Research Methods 39:445-459, 2007) have expanded the number of words that interested researchers can select according to other lexical characteristics (e.g., average naming latencies, lexical decision times, etc.). However, the dearth of imageability estimates (as well as those of other lexical characteristics) limits the items that researchers can include in their experiments. Thus, these imageability estimates for disyllabic words expand the number of words available for investigations of word processing, which should be useful for researchers interested in the influences of imageability both as an input and as an outcome variable.
How people recognise and process words has been of central importance to cognitive psychology. Word processing tasks have been used to examine general issues such as interactivity (e.g., Cortese & Schock, 2013), serial versus parallel processing (e.g., Weekes, 1997), attention (e.g., Ruz & Nobre, 2008), and more. In addition, connectionist models of word processing (e.g., Perry, Ziegler, & Zorzi, 2010) have been among the most sophisticated models of cognitive processing. Furthermore, word processing data from neuropsychological patients have been influential in developing cognitive theories of word processing (e.g., Woollams, Lambon Ralph, Plaut, & Patterson, 2007). Arguably, the lexical decision task and the reading aloud task have been the two most popular tasks used to examine word processing. In the lexical decision task, each trial involves a speeded word/nonword decision to a letter string. In the reading aloud task, subjects simply read aloud single words (and/or nonwords) as quickly and accurately as possible. It is common for word processing researchers to compare and contrast results across these two tasks to isolate certain processes (e.g., Jared, McRae, & Seidenberg, 1990). Recently, the megastudy method has been applied to examine performance on the reading aloud task and the lexical decision task (e.g., Balota et al., 2007). The megastudy involves collecting performance measures for thousands of stimuli. Typically, item means for each performance measure are computed, and multiple regression analyses uncover specific relationships between item-level variables (e.g., word frequency, length, orthographic neighbourhood size) and a performance measure (reaction time [RT]). For example, in the English Lexicon Project (i.e., ELP; Balota et al., 2007), performance measures for over 40,000 English words were collected in the reading aloud task and lexical decision task across 1,260 participants. When Yap and
Age of acquisition (AoA) ratings based on a 1-7 scale for 3,000 disyllabic words were obtained from 32 participants. We demonstrate that these estimates are both reliable and valid. These estimates add to those collected on monosyllabic words and are of value to researchers interested in factors that contribute to word processing. They also can be used in regression analyses on measures obtained from large databases, and can be used in conjunction with imageability ratings for the same word corpus to differentiate AoA from imageability.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.