Since the early seventies, several studies have suggested that the age at which words are acquired (age of acquisition, or AoA) is an important predictor of the speed and accuracy with which those words can subsequently be processed in adulthood, with words acquired early in life being processed faster and more accurately than words acquired later (e.g., Carroll & White, 1973b).This effect, referred to in the literature as the "age of acquisition" effect (AoA effect), has been reported in many lexical processing tasks including: oral and written picture naming (e.g., Barry, Morrison, & Ellis, 1997;Bonin, Fayol, & Chalard, 2001;Ellis & Morrison, 1998;Morrison, Chappell, & Ellis, 1997;Severens, Van Lommel, Ratinckx, & Hartsuiker, 2005), face naming (e.g., Moore & Valentine, 1998), word naming (e.g., Gilhooly & Logie, 1981Morrison & Ellis, 1995, category instance fluency (Catling & Johnston, 2005;Forbes-McKay, Ellis, Shanks, & Venneri, 2005;Loftus & Suppes, 1972), word completion (Gilhooly & Gilhooly, 1979), visual and auditory lexical decision (e.g., Morrison & Ellis, 1995Turner, Valentine, & Ellis, 1998), naming from definition (Sartori, Lombardi, & Matiuzzi, 2005) or perceptual identification (Lyons, Teer, & Rubenstein, 1978). Moreover, although AoA measures are related to other lexical variables, at least in word naming and lexical decision tasks, AoA effects have been found to be independent of different measures of word frequency, familiarity, imageability and word length (Morrison & Ellis, 2000).The measurement of AoA has been operationalized in two different ways: a "subjective" measure, corresponding to adult ratings of the AoA of different words; and an "objective" measure based on the performance of children of different ages in object naming tasks. Several studies have shown that both measures of AoA are strongly correlated in different languages (e.g., Carroll & White, 1973a; De Moor, Ghyselink, & Brysbaert, 2000;Jorm, 1991;Lyons et al., 1978;Morrison et al., 1997;Pérez & Navalón, 2005;Pind, Jonsdottir, Gissurardottir, & Jonsson, 2000) providing validation for the rating method. Moreover, Bonin, Barry, Méot, and Chalard (2004) showed that the two measures were still significantly correlated when other lexical variables associated with AoA (including conceptual familiarity, word frequency trajectory, cumulative word frequency, imageability and phonological length) were partialled out.All this evidence would seem to suggest that AoA is an important lexical dimension on its own that can be measured in (at least) two different ways and that influences performance on a very diverse set of tasks. However, both of these contentions are still a matter of ongoing theoretical and methodological debate. On one hand, several criticisms have been pointed out to the two AoA measures and a new measure, "frequency trajectory", has been proposed to examine age-limited learning effects (Bonin et al., 2004;Zevin & Seidenberg, 2002). On the other hand, the independence of AoA and of AoA effects have been contested, esp...