People know thousands of words in their native language, and each of these words must be learned at some time in the person's lifetime. A large number of these words will be learned when the person is an adult, reflecting the fact that the mental lexicon is continuously changing. We explore how new words get added to the mental lexicon, and provide empirical support for a theoretical distinction between what we call lexical configuration and lexical engagement. Lexical configuration is the set of factual knowledge associated with a word (e.g., the word's sound, spelling, meaning, or syntactic role). Almost all previous research on word learning has focused on this aspect. However, it is also critical to understand the process by which a word becomes capable of lexical engagement--the ways in which a lexical entry dynamically interacts with other lexical entries, and with sublexical representations. For example, lexical entries compete with each other during word recognition (inhibition within the lexical level), and they also support the activation of their constituents (top-down lexical-phonemic facilitation, and lexically-based perceptual learning). We systematically vary the learning conditions for new words, and use separate measures of lexical configuration and engagement. Several surprising dissociations in behavior demonstrate the importance of the theoretical distinction between configuration and engagement.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

9115 Background: There is minimal research examining the effect of cardiovascular and resistance exercise after surgery and/or radiation treatment to the breast and axillary area. Currently there are no guidelines for activity restrictions; however, medical providers historically have recommended limiting activity of the affected arm in an attempt to prevent the development of lymphedema. This could potentially affect future quality of life and other medical issues in breast cancer survivors. Methods: Female breast cancer survivors (n=79) completed an 8-week group exercise program meeting two days per week for cardiovascular and resistance training. Participants were also encouraged to exercise independently in addition to their group sessions. Bilateral arm girth measurements were performed on all participants upon program entry and exit. Measurements were taken distal to the ulnar styloid process (wrist) and three inches above (upper arm) and below (elbow) the lateral epicondyle of the elbow. All participants included in this analysis attended ≥ 70% of the group exercise sessions and had complete entry and exit measurements. Results: Participants attended an average of 15.94 ± 3.75 exercise sessions during the 8 week program. Changes in arm girth measurement were compared for the surgical side and non-surgical sides of the body using paired t-tests. Arm girth changes in the surgical side of the body were compared to the non-surgical side of the body using the Wilcoxon Ranked Sum test. The surgical and the non-surgical arm girths did not significantly increase at the wrist (p=0.55 and p=0.76), elbow (p=0.31 and p=0.24) or upper arm (p=0.18 and p=0.42). The changes in arm girth observed on the surgical body side were not significantly different from the changes observed on the non-surgical side (wrist (p=0.67), elbow (p=0.44), and upper arm (p=0.36). Conclusions: A structured, group-based exercise program involving both cardiovascular and resistance training did not significantly increase arm girth measurements in breast cancer survivors.