Spelling–sound consistency effects in disyllabic word naming

Chateau, Dan; Jared, Debra

doi:10.1016/s0749-596x(02)00521-1

Cited by 64 publications

(82 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…entered as dichotomous variables in the first step (see Balota, Cortese, SergentMarshall, Spieler, & Yap, 2004;Chateau & Jared, 2003;Treiman et al, 1995), followed by log-transformed word frequency (Singaporean), number of letters, orthographic neighborhood size, and orthographic Levenshtein distance.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Malay Lexicon Project: A database of lexical statistics for 9,592 words

Yap

Liow

Jalil

et al. 2010

Behavior Research Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Malay Lexicon Project: A database of lexical statistics for 9,592 words

Yap

Liow

Jalil

et al. 2010

Behavior Research Methods

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Similarly, by examining the lexical decision and naming latencies to 2,428 words (Balota & Spieler, 1998;Spieler & Balota, 1997), Balota, Cortese, SergentMarshall, Spieler, and Yap (2004) demonstrated that standard psycholinguistic variables (e.g., length, frequency, orthographic neighborhood size) were able to account for nearly half the variance in the behavioral data. However, such large-scale studies are relatively rare, tend to focus mostly on speeded naming performance, are not easily accessible to the research community, and are almost always based on single syllable words (see Chateau & Jared, 2003, for an exception). The ELP is the logical extension to this body of work, and provides normative word recognition performance for 40,000 mono-and multisyllabic words, along with a search engine that affords access to a rich set of descriptive lexical characteristics.…”

Section: The English Lexicon Projectmentioning

confidence: 99%

The English Lexicon Project

Balota

Yap

Cortese

et al. 2007

Behavior Research Methods

2,277

2,235

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One could easily argue that the most commonly studied stimulus set in experimental psychology involves English words. The study of the memory and reading of words has been central to research since Cattell (1886). Words are well-described units that provide the link between perception and meaning, and so have been critical to developments in computational modeling (e.g., McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981), neuroimaging (e.g., Petersen, Fox, Posner, Mintun, & Raichle, 1989, and conceptions of attention and automaticity (e.g., Neely, 1977;Stroop, 1935), among many other research areas.Given the importance of words as a stimulus set, one might assume that there are relatively straightforward ways to study lexical processing, and that there is a wellconstrained set of findings to which one can appeal in building models of word processing. Although there has been considerable progress in understanding how people process words, there are some clear gaps in the available literature. This paper describes the English Lexicon Project (ELP), which provides a behavioral database for over 40,000 words and nonwords that will help fill some of these gaps. The present description will focus on visual word recognition, although, as described below, the current database has relevance for other aspects of word processing, such as memory and speech production. Before describing the ELP, we will briefly describe the behavioral measures in the database, the limitations in our current knowledge, and how this database will help address these limitations. LEXICAL DECISIONS AND NAMING AS THE BEHAVIORAL TARGETSAlthough there are multiple ways to measure lexical processing (e.g., eye-fixation data, probability of iden- The English Lexicon Project is a multiuniversity effort to provide a standardized behavioral and descriptive data set for 40,481 words and 40,481 nonwords. It is available via the Internet at elexicon.wustl.edu. Data from 816 participants across six universities were collected in a lexical decision task (approximately 3400 responses per participant), and data from 444 participants were collected in a speeded naming task (approximately 2500 responses per participant). The present paper describes the motivation for this project, the methods used to collect the data, and the search engine that affords access to the behavioral measures and descriptive lexical statistics for these stimuli.

show abstract

“…It is a wellestablished fact that the performance of beginning and skilled readers (e.g., Balota, Cortese, Sergent-Marshall, & Spieler, 2004;Brand, Rey, Peereman, & Spieler, in preparation;Chateau & Jared, 2003;Treiman, Mullennix, Bijeljac-Babic, & Richmond-Welty, 1995) also depends on other idiosyncratic properties of words, particularly those related to the mapping between orthography and phonology. These observations are consistent with the view that reading processes involve multiple sources of interacting information, both at the lexical and infralexical levels of analysis, and particularly between the orthographic and phonological codes (e.g., Coltheart et al, 2001;McClelland & Rumelhart, 1981;Plaut et al, 1996).…”

Section: Lexical Databases For the Study Of Literacy Acquisitionmentioning

confidence: 99%