The Number and Relatedness of a Word’s Meanings in a Lexical Decision Task
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54097/gsfza004Keywords:
NOM, RT, Relatedness of MeaningsAbstract
Past lexical decision studies investigating the number and relatedness of meanings effect have produced mixed results. In the present experiment, we selected 20 ambiguous words and 12 non-words, and asked 30 English major students to judge whether they were real words or not, and then recorded their reaction time. In lexical decision tasks, relatedness (high or low), NOM (many or few), and nonword condition were manipulated. After an analysis of variance, we find that the NOM effect is significant but no significant effect of relatedness was observed in the experiment. The results show that the number of a word’s meanings can influence lexical decision performance.
Downloads
References
Ahrens, K. (1999). The mutability of noun and verb meaning. In Y. Yin, et al. (Eds.), Chinese languages and linguistics V: Interactions in language (pp. 335–548). Taipei: Academia Sinica.
Ahrens, K. (2006). The effect of visual target presentation times on lexical ambiguity resolution. Language and Linguistics, 7, 677–696.
Ahrens, K., Chang, L., Chen, K., & Huang, C. (1998). Meaning representation and meaning instantiation for Chinese nominals. Computational Linguistics and Chinese Language Processing, 3, 45–60.
Alan, B. et al. (2005). The effects of homonymy and polysemy on lexical access: an meg study. Cognitive Brain Research, 24(1), 57-65.
Balota, D. A. et al. (1991). On the early influence of meanings in word recognition: A review of the literature. In P. Schwanenflugel (Ed.), The psychology of word meanings, (pp. 187– 222). NJ: Erlbaum.
Brown, S. W. (2008). Polysemy and the mental lexicon. Colorado Research in Linguistics, 21,1–12.
Forster, K. I., & Chambers, I. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 12, 627–635.
Fraga, I., Padrón, I., Perea, M., Comesaña, M. (2017). I saw this somewhere else: The Spanish Ambiguous Words (SAW) database. Lingua, 185, 1-10.
Haro, J. , Demestre, J. , Boada, R. , & Ferré, Pilar. (2017). Erp and behavioral effects of semantic ambiguity in a lexical decision task. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 44, 190-202.
Hino, Y., Kusunose, Y., & Lupker, S. J. (2010). The relatedness-of-meaning effect for ambiguous words in lexical-decision tasks: When does relatedness matter? Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology / Revue canadienne de psychologie expérimentale, 64(3), 180–196. https://doi.org/ 10.1037/a0020475
Kellas, G. et al. (1988). Lexical ambiguity and the time-course of attentional allocation in word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 14, 601–609.
Lin, CJ.C., Ahrens, K. Ambiguity Advantage Revisited: Two Meanings are Better than One When Accessing Chinese Nouns. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 39, 1–19 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10936-009-9120-8.
Millis, M. L., Button, S. B. (1989). The effect of polysemy on lexical decision time: Now you see it, now you don’t. Memory & Cognition, 17, 141–147.
Onifer, W., & Swinney, D. (1981). Accessing lexical ambiguities during sentence comprehension: Effects of frequency of meaning and contextual bias. Memory and Cognition, 15, 225–236.
Orden, G. C. V., & Azuma, T (1997). Why safe is better than fast: the relatedness of a word's meanings affects lexical decision times. Journal of Memory and Language. 36(4), 484-504.
Orden, G. C. V. et al. (1990). Word identification in reading and the promise of subsymbolic psycholinguistics. Psychological Review, 97(4), 488.
Paap, K. R., & Ogden, W. C. (1981). Letter encoding is an obligatory but capacity-demanding operation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 7, 518-527.
Piercey, C. D., & Joordens, S. (2000). Turning an advantage into a disadvantage: Ambiguity effects in lexical decision versus reading tasks. Memory and Cognition, 28, 657–666.
Plaut, D. C., & Shallice, T. (1993). Deep dyslexia: A case study of connectionist neuropsychology. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 10, 377–500.
Raab, D. H. (1962). Statistical facilitation of simple reaction times. Transactions of the New York Academy of Sciences, 24, 574–590.
Rubenstein, H., Garfield, L., & Millikan, J. A. (1970). Homographic entries in the internal lexicon. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 9, 487–494.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 International Journal of Education and Humanities
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
