Previous network analyses of the phonological lexicon (Vitevitch, 2008) observed a web-like structure that exhibited assortative mixing by degree: words with dense phonological neighborhoods tend to have as neighbors words that also have dense phonological neighborhoods, and words with sparse phonological neighborhoods tend to have as neighbors words that also have sparse phonological neighborhoods. Given the role that assortative mixing by degree plays in network resilience, we examined instances of real and simulated lexical retrieval failures in computer simulations, analysis of a slips-of-the-ear corpus, and three psycholinguistic experiments for evidence of this network characteristic in human behavior. The results of the various analyses support the hypothesis that the structure of words in the mental lexicon influences lexical processing. The implications of network science for current models of spoken word recognition, language processing, and cognitive psychology more generally are discussed.

Clustering coefficient, C, measures the extent to which neighbors of a word are also neighbors of each other, and has been shown to influence speech production, speech perception, and several memory-related processes. In this study we examined how C influences word-learning. Participants were trained over three sessions at 1-week intervals, and tested with a picture-naming task on nonword-nonobject pairs. We found an advantage for novel words with high C (the neighbors of this novel word are likely to be neighbors with each other), but only after the 1-week retention period with no additional exposures to the stimuli. The results are consistent with the spreading-activation network-model of the lexicon proposed by Chan and Vitevitch (2009). The influence of C on various language-related processes suggests that characteristics of the individual word are not the only things that influence processing; rather, lexical processing may also be influenced by the relationships that exist among words in the lexicon.

The present study examined how the network science measure known as closeness centrality (which measures the average distance between a node and all other nodes in the network) influences lexical processing. In the mental lexicon, a word such as CAN has high closeness centrality, because it is close to many other words in the lexicon. Whereas, a word such as CURE has low closeness centrality because it is far from other words in the lexicon. In an auditory lexical decision task (Experiment 1) participants responded more quickly to words with high closeness centrality. In Experiment 2 an auditory lexical decision task was again used, but with a wider range of stimulus characteristics. Although, there was no main effect of closeness centrality in Experiment 2, an interaction between closeness centrality and frequency of occurrence was observed on reaction times. The results are explained in terms of partial activation gradually strengthening over time word-forms that are centrally located in the phonological network.

Network science draws from a number of fields to examine complex systems using nodes to represent individuals and connections to represent relationships between individuals to form a network. This approach has been used in several areas of Psychology to illustrate the influence that the structure of a network has on processing in that system. In the present study the concept of keyplayers in a network (Borgatti, 2006) was examined in the domain of Psycholinguistics. Keyplayers are nodes in a network that, when removed, result in the network fracturing into several smaller components. A set of such nodes was found in a network of phonological word-forms as was another set of foil words, comparable to the “keywords” on a number of lexical and network characteristics. In three conventional psycholinguistic tasks keywords were responded to more quickly and accurately than the foils. A similar trend was observed in an analysis of the keywords and foils (and another set of foils) in the English Lexicon Project. These results open avenues for further exploration of keywords in various areas of language processing, and demonstrate the utility of the network science approach to psycholinguistics and psychology more generally.

No abstract