In psychology, attempts to replicate published findings are less successful than expected. For properly powered studies replication rate should be around 80%, whereas in practice less than 40% of the studies selected from different areas of psychology can be replicated. Researchers in cognitive psychology are hindered in estimating the power of their studies, because the designs they use present a sample of stimulus materials to a sample of participants, a situation not covered by most power formulas. To remedy the situation, we review the literature related to the topic and introduce recent software packages, which we apply to the data of two masked priming studies with high power. We checked how we could estimate the power of each study and how much they could be reduced to remain powerful enough. On the basis of this analysis, we recommend that a properly powered reaction time experiment with repeated measures has at least 1,600 word observations per condition (e.g., 40 participants, 40 stimuli). This is considerably more than current practice. We also show that researchers must include the number of observations in meta-analyses because the effect sizes currently reported depend on the number of stimuli presented to the participants. Our analyses can easily be applied to new datasets gathered.

No abstract

No abstract

Everyday circumstances require ef␣cient updating of behavior. Brain systems in the right inferior frontal cortex have been identi␣ed as critical for some aspects of behavioral updating, such as stopping actions. However, the precise role of these neural systems is con- troversial. Here we examined how the inferior frontal cortex updates behavior by combining reversible cortical interference (transcranial magnetic stimulation) with an experimental task that measures different types of updating. We found that the right inferior frontal cortex can be functionally segregated into two subregions: a dorsal region, which is critical for visual detection of changes in the environment, and a ventral region, which updates the corresponding action plan. This dissociation reconciles competing accounts of pre- frontal organization and casts light on the neural architecture of human cognitive control

Based on an analysis of the literature and a large scale crowdsourcing experiment, we estimate that an average 20-year-old native speaker of American English knows 42,000 lemmas and 4,200 non-transparent multiword expressions, derived from 11,100 word families. The numbers range from 27,000 lemmas for the lowest 5% to 52,000 for the highest 5%. Between the ages of 20 and 60, the average person learns 6,000 extra lemmas or about one new lemma every 2 days. The knowledge of the words can be as shallow as knowing that the word exists. In addition, people learn tens of thousands of inflected forms and proper nouns (names), which account for the substantially high numbers of ‘words known’ mentioned in other publications.

We use the results of a large online experiment on word knowledge in Dutch to investigate variables influencing vocabulary size in a large population and to examine the effect of word prevalence-the percentage of a population knowing a word-as a measure of word occurrence. Nearly 300,000 participants were presented with about 70 word stimuli (selected from a list of 53,000 words) in an adapted lexical decision task. We identify age, education, and multilingualism as the most important factors influencing vocabulary size. The results suggest that the accumulation of vocabulary throughout life and in multiple languages mirrors the logarithmic growth of number of types with number of tokens observed in text corpora (Herdan's law). Moreover, the vocabulary that multilinguals acquire in related languages seems to increase their first language (L1) vocabulary size and outweighs the loss caused by decreased exposure to L1. In addition, we show that corpus word frequency and prevalence are complementary measures of word occurrence covering a broad range of language experiences. Prevalence is shown to be the strongest independent predictor of word processing times in the Dutch Lexicon Project, making it an important variable for psycholinguistic research.

Reading affords opportunities for L2 vocabulary acquisition. Empirical research into the pace and trajectory of this acquisition has both theoretical and applied value. Charting the development of different aspects of word knowledge can verify and inform theoretical frameworks of word learning and reading comprehension. It can also inform practical decisions about using L2 readings in academic study. Monitoring readers' eye movements provides real-time data on word learning, under the conditions that closely approximate adult L2 vocabulary acquisition from reading. In this study, Dutch-speaking university students read an English expository text, while their eye movements were recorded. Of interest were patterns of change in the eye movements on the target low-frequency words that occurred multiple times in the text, and whether differences in the processing of target and

Keuleers, Stevens, Mandera, and Brysbaert (2015) presented a new variable, word prevalence, defined as word knowledge in the population. Some words are known to more people than other. This is particularly true for low-frequency words (e.g., screenshot vs. scourage). In the present study, we examined the impact of the measure by collecting lexical decision times for 30,000 Dutch word lemmas of various lengths (the Dutch Lexicon Project 2). Word prevalence had the second highest correlation with lexical decision times (after word frequency): Words known by everyone in the population were responded to 100 ms faster than words known to only half of the population, even after controlling for word frequency, word length, age of acquisition, similarity to other words, and concreteness. Because word prevalence has rather low correlations with the existing measures (including word frequency), the unique variance it contributes to lexical decision times is higher than that of the other variables. We consider the reasons why word prevalence has an impact on word processing times and we argue that it is likely to be the most important new variable protecting researchers against experimenter bias in selecting stimulus materials.