Observing neighborhood effects without neighbors

Suárez, Lidia; Tan, Siew Li; Yap, Melvin J.; Goh, Winston D.

doi:10.3758/s13423-011-0078-9

Cited by 38 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, we showed that words that are phonologically similar to many other words (i.e., with low PLD20 values) were responded to faster than phonologically dissimilar words (i.e., with high PLD20 values). This latter result departs from the general finding that, in the auditory modality, words with more similar sounding (or closer phonological neighbors) are usually recognized more slowly than more distinct word-forms (e.g., Goh et al, 2009;Goh et al, 2016;Suárez, Tan, Yap, & Goh, 2011;Ziegler et al, 2003), but it converges with the general finding that, in the visual modality, words that are orthographically similar to many other words are responded to faster than orthographically dissimilar words (e.g., Brysbaert et al, 2016;Ferrand et al, 2010;Keuleers, Diependaele, & Brysbaert, 2010;Keuleers et al, 2012). Concerning phonological uniqueness point, our results are consistent with the general finding that words with an early phonological uniqueness point are responded to faster than words with a late phonological uniqueness point (e.g., Radeau & Morais, 1990;Radeau et al, 2000;Radeau et al, 1989).…”

Section: Summary Of Findingscontrasting

confidence: 84%

MEGALEX: A megastudy of visual and auditory word recognition

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Using the megastudy approach, we report a new database (MEGALEX) of visual and auditory lexical decision times and accuracy rates for tens of thousands of words. We collected visual lexical decision data for 28,466 French words and the same number of pseudowords, and auditory lexical decision data for 17,876 French words and the same number of pseudowords (synthesized tokens were used for the auditory modality). This constitutes the first large-scale database for auditory lexical decision, and the first database to enable a direct comparison of word recognition in different modalities. Different regression analyses were conducted to illustrate potential ways to exploit this megastudy database. First, we compared the proportions of variance accounted for by five word frequency measures. Second, we conducted item-level regression analyses to examine the relative importance of the lexical variables influencing performance in the different modalities (visual and auditory). Finally, we compared the similarities and differences between the two modalities. All data are freely available on our website ( https://sedufau.shinyapps.io/megalex/ ) and are searchable at www.lexique.org , inside the Open Lexique search engine.

show abstract

Section: Summary Of Findingscontrasting

confidence: 84%

MEGALEX: A megastudy of visual and auditory word recognition

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Therefore, it is sensible to assume that our bilinguals must have used their experience with English and suprasegmental correlates of lexical stress, such as pitch and intensity, while processing stressed and unstressed syllables within words. Finally, previous research on the effects of word frequency and lexical competition during spoken word recognition has used Singaporean samples, and the results have yielded results comparable to those obtained with English monolingual samples (e.g., Suárez, Tan, Yap, & Goh, 2011).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 58%

Recognition memory for foreign language lexical stress

Suárez

Goh

2013

Mem Cogn

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated whether English speakers retained the lexical stress patterns of newly learned Spanish words. Participants studied spoken Spanish words (e.g., DUcha [shower], ciuDAD [city]; stressed syllables in capital letters) and subsequently performed a recognition task, in which studied words were presented with the same lexical stress pattern (DUcha) or the opposite lexical stress pattern (CIUdad). Participants were able to discriminate same-from opposite-stress words, indicating that lexical stress was encoded and used in the recognition process. Word-form similarity to English also influenced outcomes, with Spanish cognate words and words with trochaic stress (MANgo) being recognized more often and more quickly than Spanish cognate words with iambic stress (soLAR) and noncognates. The results suggest that while segmental and suprasegmental features of the native language influence foreign word recognition, foreign lexical stress patterns are encoded and not discarded in memory.Keywords Lexical stress . Auditory word recognition . Bilingualism . Psycholinguistics . Language acquisition Lexical stress refers to the pattern of stressed and unstressed syllables within single words. For example, the word pencil is pronounced with more stress on the first syllable (/′pen/) than on the second syllable (/səl/). The present study employed a recognition memory task to investigate two research questions: first, whether English speakers use foreign lexical stress cues to recognize newly learned Spanish words and, second, the extent to which similarity to English word forms influences the recognition process. Lexical stress cues in English and Spanish

show abstract

“…More interesting, over 95% of the responses that differed from the target word by more than a single phoneme had a path that connected the target word to the more distant response, such as being presented with dog and responding with bag (see Figure 1). The existence of lexical intermediaries between the target word and more distant responses raises some concerns about measures of word-form similarity that ignore such items, such as the Orthographic Levenshtein Distance-20 ( OLD-20 ; Yarkoni, Balota & Yap, 2008), and the Phonological Levenshtein Distance-20 ( PLD-20 ; Suárez, Tan, Yap & Goh, 2011). Computations of OLD-20 / PLD-20 do not consider whether real-word intermediaries exist or not; the measure only considers the number of letter/phoneme changes (respectively) that are required to turn one word into another.…”

Section: How Lexical Structure Influences Lexical Processingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using network science in the language sciences and clinic

Vitevitch

Castro

2014

International Journal of Speech-Language Pathology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A number of variables—word frequency, word length—have long been known to influence language processing. We briefly review the effects in speech perception and production of two more recently examined variables: phonotactic probability and neighborhood density. We then describe a new approach to study language, network science, which is an interdisciplinary field drawing from mathematics, computer science, physics, and other disciplines. In this approach, nodes represent individual entities in a system (i.e., phonological word-forms in the lexicon), links between nodes represent relationships between nodes (i.e., phonological neighbors), and various measures enable researchers to assess the micro-level (i.e., the individual word), the macro-level (i.e., characteristics about the whole system), and the meso-level (i.e., how an individual fits into smaller sub-groups in the larger system). Although research on individual lexical characteristics such as word-frequency has increased our understanding of language processing, these measures only assess the “micro-level.” Using network science, researchers can examine words at various levels in the system, and how each word relates to the many other words stored in the lexicon. Several new findings using the network science approach are summarized to illustrate how this approach can be used to advance basic research as well as clinical practice.

show abstract

Observing neighborhood effects without neighbors

Cited by 38 publications

References 19 publications

MEGALEX: A megastudy of visual and auditory word recognition

MEGALEX: A megastudy of visual and auditory word recognition

Recognition memory for foreign language lexical stress

Using network science in the language sciences and clinic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About