Structural Comparison of Cognitive Associative Networks in Two Populations¹

Abstract

The cognitive associative structure of 2 populations was studied using network analysis of free-word associations. Structural differences in the associative networks were compared using measures of network centralization, size, density, clustering, and path length. These measures are closely aligned with cognitive theories describing the organization of knowledge and retrieval of concepts from memory. Size and centralization of semantic structures were larger for college students than for 7 th graders, while density, clustering, and mean path length were similar. Findings presented reveal that subpopulations might have very different cognitive associative networks. This study suggests that graph theory and network analysis methods are useful in mapping differences in associative structures across groups.

Semantic word association: Comparative data for Brazilian children and adults.

“…These results appear to conflict with other studies. For example, Coronges et al (2007) verified a larger meaning set size in adults compared with 12-to 13-year-old children. When all of the provided responses were considered (i.e., total set size), the measure was larger in the children.…”

“…A longitudinal or cross-sectional study with a larger number of age groups may clarify whether the semantic association of words is able to illustrate the acquisition process of new concepts or enhancement of existing concepts. Additionally, the ages of the adults were not presented in previous studies (e.g., Macizo et al, 2000;Coronges et al, 2007), making rigorous comparisons difficult.…”

“…Although the total set size was larger in the seventh graders, the meaning set size was smaller compared with the adults. According to Coronges et al (2007), the younger participants may filter their responses less and possess more divergent thought.…”

“…According to the authors, learning occurs through a tuning process between the onset of adolescence and adulthood in which associations are refined so that the number of words to explain a phenomenon is reduced. Coronges et al (2007) investigated total and meaning set sizes in a sample of 1,097 seventh graders aged 12 to 13 years compared with the adult sample reported by Nelson et al (1999) that consisted of more than 6,000 adults. Although the total set size was larger in the seventh graders, the meaning set size was smaller compared with the adults.…”

“…Depending on the instructions received by the participants, word association tasks may involve free association (Nelson, McEvoy, & Schreiber, 1999) in which participants must respond with the first word that comes to mind (associate) when a stimulusword (target) is presented, or semantic association in which the response must have a meaning related to the target (Coronges, Stacy, & Valente, 2007;Salles, Holderbaum, & Machado, 2009). Nelson et al (1999) proposed the psychological implication of such an evaluation, suggesting that the process of evocating new information is mediated by the preexisting and implicit association strength between a word to be recalled and a cue or contextual stimulus word.…”