1951
DOI: 10.1037/h0056020
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Visual duration threshold as a function of word-probability.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

10
215
1
3

Year Published

1989
1989
2015
2015

Publication Types

Select...
7
1
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 402 publications
(229 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
10
215
1
3
Order By: Relevance
“…Not all definitions are equally significant in order to understand how CSR is defined; the most frequently used definition is more significant than a definition rarely used. This principle has been used by linguists for a long time (Howes and Solomon, 1951;Kageura and Umino, 1996;Murphy, 1992, Blair et al, 2002.…”
Section: How Corporate Social Responsibility Is Definedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Not all definitions are equally significant in order to understand how CSR is defined; the most frequently used definition is more significant than a definition rarely used. This principle has been used by linguists for a long time (Howes and Solomon, 1951;Kageura and Umino, 1996;Murphy, 1992, Blair et al, 2002.…”
Section: How Corporate Social Responsibility Is Definedmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A variety of response measures has established that recognition of lowfrequency words is poorer than recognition of high-frequency words (e.g., Howes & Solomon, 1951). Superior performance on high-frequency words may be observed either in the speed of the response when the stimulus information is sufficient to support accurate performance, as in most reactiontime paradigms (e.g., Marslen-Wilson, 1987) or in the accuracy of the response when the stimulus is degraded (e.g., Luce, 1986;Goldinger, Luce, & Pisoni, 1989).…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Thus, twelve studies fmding significant effects were cited (e.g., Howes & Solomon, 1951), with one exception showing a trend in the same direction (Orenstein & Meighan, 1976). Likewise, the five original experiments I reported found rated familiarity to correlate +.33 (p < .001) with overall recognition.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%