Rapid communication: Semantic size does not matter: “Bigger” words are not recognized faster

Abstract

Sereno, O’Donnell, and Sereno (2009) reported that words are recognised faster in a lexical decision task when their referents are physically large rather than small, suggesting that “semantic size” might be an important variable that should be considered in visual word recognition research and modelling. We sought to replicate their size effect, but failed to find a significant latency advantage in lexical decision for “big” words (cf. “small” words), even though we used the same word stimuli as Sereno et al. and had almost three times as many subjects. We also examined existing data from visual word recognition megastudies (e.g., English Lexicon Project), and found that semantic size is not a significant predictor of lexical decision performance after controlling for the standard lexical variables. In summary, the null results from our lab experiment—despite a much larger subject sample size than Sereno et al.—converged with our analysis of mega-study lexical decision performance, leading us to conclude that semantic size does not matter for word recognition. Discussion focuses on why semantic size (unlike some other semantic variables) is unlikely to play a role in lexical decision.

Sensory experience ratings for over 5,000 mono- and disyllabic words

“…For example, imageability effects in monosyllabic word-naming performance were no longer significant once AoA was controlled for (Cortese & Khanna, 2007). Likewise, the semantic size variable introduced by Sereno, O'Donnell, and Sereno (2009) did not account for variance in lexical-decision performance when correlated variables were included in the analysis with 324 words (Kang, Yap, Tse, & Kurby, 2011).…”

Object Shape and Orientation Do Not Routinely Influence Performance During Language Processing

“…Both facilitation (Zwaan et al, 2002) and interference (Richardson, Spivey, Barsalou, & McRae, 2003) have also been reported for orientation. Finally, Kang, Yap, Tse, and Kurby (2011) failed to replicate an effect of object size reported by Sereno, O’Donnell, and Sereno (2009).…”

The Chinese Lexicon Project: A megastudy of lexical decision performance for 25,000+ traditional Chinese two-character compound words

“…For example, by performing analyses on normative data of a much larger word pool in Balota et al's (2007) English Lexicon Project, Kang, Yap, Tse, and Kurby (2011) found that the semantic size effect (i.e., faster lexical decision RTs to words when their referents are physically large, e.g., elephant, than when they are small, e.g., needle) might not generalize beyond the original stimulus set used in earlier studies (see also Juhasz, Yap, Dicke, Taylor, & Gullick, 2011, for New, Ferrand, Pallier, and Brysbaert (2006) found a U-shaped effect of word length on English lexical decision (facilitative for words of 3-5 letters, null for words of 6-8 letters, and inhibitory for words of 9-13 letters), contradicting the view that longer words always take more time to process. By conducting item-level multiple regression analyses on lexical decision performance based on a larger pool of words, the linear and/or nonlinear of effect of targeted variables would be captured more easily, which could not be observed in factorialdesign experiments where variables are dichotomized.…”