• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Lexical familiarity and processing efficiency: individual differences in naming, lexical decision, and semantic categorization.词汇熟悉度与加工效率:命名、词汇判断及语义分类中的个体差异
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1993 Sep;122(3):316-30. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.122.3.316.
2
Ambiguity and synonymy effects in lexical decision, naming, and semantic categorization tasks: interactions between orthography, phonology, and semantics.词汇判断、命名和语义分类任务中的歧义与同义词效应:正字法、音系学和语义学之间的相互作用。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2002 Jul;28(4):686-713.
3
Word familiarity and frequency in visual and auditory word recognition.视觉和听觉单词识别中的单词熟悉度与词频
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 1990 Nov;16(6):1084-96. doi: 10.1037//0278-7393.16.6.1084.
4
How strongly do word reading times and lexical decision times correlate? Combining data from eye movement corpora and megastudies.单词阅读时间和词汇判断时间的相关性有多强?结合来自眼动语料库和大型研究的数据。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2013;66(3):563-80. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.658820. Epub 2012 Apr 24.
5
Dissociating the influence of familiarity and meaningfulness from word frequency in naming and lexical decision performance.在命名和词汇判断任务中,区分熟悉度和意义性与词频的影响。
Mem Cognit. 2006 Sep;34(6):1312-24. doi: 10.3758/bf03193274.
6
A dissociative word-frequency X levels-of-processing interaction in episodic recognition and lexical decision tasks.在情景记忆识别和词汇判断任务中,分离性词频与加工水平的交互作用。
Mem Cognit. 1989 Mar;17(2):148-62. doi: 10.3758/bf03197065.
7
A database of 629 English compound words: ratings of familiarity, lexeme meaning dominance, semantic transparency, age of acquisition, imageability, and sensory experience.629 个英语复合词数据库:熟悉度评分、词元意义主导性、语义透明度、习得年龄、形象性和感官体验。
Behav Res Methods. 2015 Dec;47(4):1004-1019. doi: 10.3758/s13428-014-0523-6.
8
My word! Interference from reading object names implies a role for competition during picture name retrieval.天哪!阅读物体名称产生的干扰意味着在图片命名检索过程中存在竞争作用。
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2012;65(6):1229-40. doi: 10.1080/17470218.2012.655699. Epub 2012 Mar 5.
9
The processing of blend words in naming and sentence reading.命名和句子阅读中混合词的加工
Q J Exp Psychol (Hove). 2019 Apr;72(4):847-857. doi: 10.1177/1747021818768441. Epub 2018 Apr 16.
10
Distinguishing common and task-specific processes in word identification: a matter of some moment?区分单词识别中的常见过程和特定任务过程:这是一个重要问题吗?
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2001 Mar;27(2):514-44. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.27.2.514.

引用本文的文献

1
Examining the Relationship Between Multiple Tests of Receptive Vocabulary.考察多种接受性词汇测试之间的关系。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2024 Feb 12;67(2):595-605. doi: 10.1044/2023_JSLHR-22-00617. Epub 2024 Jan 24.
2
Validation of two measures for assessing English vocabulary knowledge on web-based testing platforms: long-form assessments.基于网络测试平台评估英语词汇知识的两种方法的验证:长篇评估
Linguist Vanguard. 2023 Sep 13;9(1):113-124. doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2022-0115. eCollection 2023 Dec.
3
Validation of two measures for assessing English vocabulary knowledge on web-based testing platforms: brief assessments.基于网络测试平台的两种英语词汇知识评估方法的验证:简要评估
Linguist Vanguard. 2023 Sep 13;9(1):99-111. doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2022-0116. eCollection 2023 Dec.
4
Extraordinary Speech and Language Outcomes After Auditory Brainstem Implantation: Guidance From a Case Study.听觉脑干植入术后的非凡言语和语言康复:来自病例研究的指导。
Am J Audiol. 2023 Dec 4;32(4):761-778. doi: 10.1044/2023_AJA-23-00099. Epub 2023 Nov 6.
5
Exceptional Speech Recognition Outcomes After Cochlear Implantation: Lessons From Two Case Studies.人工耳蜗植入后卓越的言语识别结果:来自两个案例研究的经验。
Am J Audiol. 2022 Sep;31(3):552-566. doi: 10.1044/2022_AJA-21-00261. Epub 2022 Aug 9.
6
Generalizable predictive modeling of semantic processing ability from functional brain connectivity.从功能脑连接预测语义处理能力的可推广模型
Hum Brain Mapp. 2022 Oct 1;43(14):4274-4292. doi: 10.1002/hbm.25953. Epub 2022 May 25.
7
Unique patterns of hearing loss and cognition in older adults' neural responses to cues for speech recognition difficulty.老年人神经反应对言语识别困难线索的听力损失和认知的独特模式。
Brain Struct Funct. 2022 Jan;227(1):203-218. doi: 10.1007/s00429-021-02398-2. Epub 2021 Oct 10.
8
Forward Digit Span and Word Familiarity Do Not Correlate With Differences in Speech Recognition in Individuals With Cochlear Implants After Accounting for Auditory Resolution.在考虑听觉分辨率差异后,向前数字跨度和单词熟悉度与人工耳蜗植入者的语音识别差异不相关。
J Speech Lang Hear Res. 2021 Aug 9;64(8):3330-3342. doi: 10.1044/2021_JSLHR-20-00574. Epub 2021 Jul 12.
9
Is the author recognition test a useful metric for native and non-native English speakers? An item response theory analysis.作者识别测试对于英语本族语者和非英语本族语者是否有用?一项项目反应理论分析。
Behav Res Methods. 2021 Oct;53(5):2226-2237. doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01556-y. Epub 2021 Apr 5.
10
The India Face Set: International and Cultural Boundaries Impact Face Impressions and Perceptions of Category Membership.印度面孔集:国际和文化边界影响对面孔的印象及类别归属认知。
Front Psychol. 2021 Feb 11;12:627678. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.627678. eCollection 2021.

本文引用的文献

1
Intelligence as an information-processing concept.作为一种信息处理概念的智力。
Br J Psychol. 1980 Nov;71(Pt 4):449-74. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8295.1980.tb01760.x.
2
Children's use of phonological encoding when reading for meaning.
Mem Cognit. 1980 May;8(3):195-209. doi: 10.3758/bf03197607.
3
Individual differences in long-term memory access.长期记忆提取中的个体差异。
Mem Cognit. 1981 Nov;9(6):599-608. doi: 10.3758/bf03202354.
4
Semantic context effects in visual word recognition: an analysis of semantic strategies.视觉单词识别中的语义语境效应:语义策略分析
Mem Cognit. 1980 Nov;8(6):493-512. doi: 10.3758/bf03213769.
5
An activation--verification model for letter and word recognition: the word-superiority effect.一种用于字母和单词识别的激活验证模型:单词优势效应。
Psychol Rev. 1982 Sep;89(5):573-94.
6
An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 2. The contextual enhancement effect and some tests and extensions of the model.字母感知中语境效应的交互激活模型:第二部分。语境增强效应及该模型的一些测试与扩展
Psychol Rev. 1982 Jan;89(1):60-94.
7
On the nature of intelligence.论智力的本质。
Science. 1983 Jan 14;219(4581):141-6. doi: 10.1126/science.6849125.
8
A word's meaning affects the decision in lexical decision.一个单词的含义会影响词汇判断中的决策。
Mem Cognit. 1984 Nov;12(6):590-606. doi: 10.3758/bf03213348.
9
Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy.解决20年来词汇熟悉度与正字法、具体性和一词多义性之间不一致的相互作用问题。
J Exp Psychol Gen. 1984 Jun;113(2):256-81. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.113.2.256.
10
Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage.词汇判断是衡量词汇通达的好方法吗?词频在被忽视的判断阶段中的作用。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1984 Jun;10(3):340-57. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.10.3.340.

词汇熟悉度与加工效率:命名、词汇判断及语义分类中的个体差异

Lexical familiarity and processing efficiency: individual differences in naming, lexical decision, and semantic categorization.

作者信息

Lewellen M J, Goldinger S D, Pisoni D B, Greene B G

机构信息

Psychology Department, Indiana University Bloomington 47405.

出版信息

J Exp Psychol Gen. 1993 Sep;122(3):316-30. doi: 10.1037//0096-3445.122.3.316.

DOI:10.1037//0096-3445.122.3.316
PMID:8371087
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3514868/
Abstract

College students were separated into 2 groups (high and low) on the basis of 3 measures: subjective familiarity ratings of words, self-reported language experiences, and a test of vocabulary knowledge. Three experiments were conducted to determine if the groups also differed in visual word naming, lexical decision, and semantic categorization. High Ss were consistently faster than low Ss in naming visually presented words. They were also faster and more accurate in making difficult lexical decisions and in rejecting homophone foils in semantic categorization. Taken together, the results demonstrate that Ss who differ in lexical familiarity also differ in processing efficiency. The relationship between processing efficiency and working memory accounts of individual differences in language processing is also discussed.

摘要

大学生根据三项指标被分为两组(高分组和低分组):单词的主观熟悉度评分、自我报告的语言经历以及词汇知识测试。进行了三项实验,以确定这两组在视觉单词命名、词汇判断和语义分类方面是否也存在差异。在命名视觉呈现的单词时,高分组的被试始终比低分组的被试速度更快。在做出困难的词汇判断以及在语义分类中拒绝同音异形干扰项时,他们也更快且更准确。综合来看,结果表明在词汇熟悉度上存在差异的被试在加工效率上也存在差异。还讨论了加工效率与语言加工中个体差异的工作记忆解释之间的关系。