• 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

比较命名、词汇判断和眼动注视时间:词频效应与个体差异。

Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: word frequency effects and individual differences.

作者信息

Schilling H H, Rayner K, Chumbley J I

机构信息

University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

出版信息

Mem Cognit. 1998 Nov;26(6):1270-81. doi: 10.3758/bf03201199.

DOI:10.3758/bf03201199
PMID:9847550
Abstract

Performance on three different tasks was compared: naming, lexical decision, and reading (with eye fixation times on a target word measured). We examined the word frequency effect for a common set of words for each task and each subject. Naming and reading (particularly gaze duration) yielded similar frequency effects for the target words. The frequency effect found in lexical decision was greater than that found in naming and in eye fixation times. In all tasks, there was a correlation between the frequency effect and average response time. In general, the results suggest that both the naming and the lexical decision tasks yield data about word recognition processes that are consistent with effects found in eye fixations during silent reading.

摘要

我们比较了在三种不同任务中的表现

命名、词汇判断和阅读(同时测量对目标单词的注视时间)。我们针对每个任务和每个受试者的一组常见单词研究了词频效应。命名和阅读(尤其是注视持续时间)对目标单词产生了相似的词频效应。词汇判断中发现的词频效应大于命名和注视时间中发现的效应。在所有任务中,词频效应与平均反应时间之间存在相关性。总体而言,结果表明命名和词汇判断任务所产生的关于单词识别过程的数据,与默读时注视中发现的效应一致。

相似文献

1
Comparing naming, lexical decision, and eye fixation times: word frequency effects and individual differences.比较命名、词汇判断和眼动注视时间:词频效应与个体差异。
Mem Cognit. 1998 Nov;26(6):1270-81. doi: 10.3758/bf03201199.
2
Lexical processing and text integration of function and content words: evidence from priming and eye fixations.功能词和实词的词汇加工与文本整合:来自启动效应和眼动注视的证据。
Mem Cognit. 2000 Oct;28(7):1098-108. doi: 10.3758/bf03211811.
3
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.
4
Attentional resource demands of visual word recognition in naming and lexical decisions.命名和词汇判断中视觉单词识别的注意力资源需求。
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1992 May;18(2):460-70. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.18.2.460.
5
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.
6
Spelling-sound regularity effects on eye fixations in reading.拼写-发音规律对阅读中眼动注视的影响。
Percept Psychophys. 2000 Feb;62(2):402-9. doi: 10.3758/bf03205559.
7
Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation durations in reading.研究一组相互关联的变量对阅读中注视持续时间的影响。
J Exp Psychol Learn Mem Cogn. 2003 Nov;29(6):1312-8. doi: 10.1037/0278-7393.29.6.1312.
8
Feedforward and feedback consistency effects for high- and low-frequency words in lexical decision and naming.词汇判断和命名任务中高频与低频词汇的前馈和反馈一致性效应
Q J Exp Psychol A. 2004 Oct;57(7):1261-84. doi: 10.1080/02724980343000756.
9
Compound word effects differ in reading, on-line naming, and delayed naming tasks.复合词效应在阅读、即时命名和延迟命名任务中存在差异。
Mem Cognit. 1996 Jul;24(4):466-76. doi: 10.3758/bf03200935.
10
Effects of deletion neighbourhood frequency and individual differences in lexical decision, progressive demasking, and naming.删除近邻频率和词汇判断、渐进掩蔽和命名中个体差异的影响。
Can J Exp Psychol. 2020 Jun;74(2):111-124. doi: 10.1037/cep0000193. Epub 2019 Oct 24.

引用本文的文献

1
How low can you go? Tracking eye movements during reading at different sampling rates.你能低到什么程度?以不同采样率跟踪阅读过程中的眼球运动。
Behav Res Methods. 2025 Jun 9;57(7):195. doi: 10.3758/s13428-025-02713-3.
2
Neural correlates of reading aloud on the autism spectrum.自闭症谱系中大声朗读的神经关联。
Sci Rep. 2025 Mar 10;15(1):8240. doi: 10.1038/s41598-025-88903-7.
3
The Beijing Sentence Corpus II: A cross-script comparison between traditional and simplified Chinese sentence reading.《北京句子语料库II:繁体中文与简体中文句子阅读的跨文字比较》

本文引用的文献

1
Eye movement control in reading and visual search: Effects of word frequency.阅读和视觉搜索中的眼球运动控制:词频的影响。
Psychon Bull Rev. 1996 Jun;3(2):245-8. doi: 10.3758/BF03212426.
2
Visual attention in reading: Eye movements reflect cognitive processes.阅读中的视觉注意:眼动反映认知过程。
Mem Cognit. 1977 Jul;5(4):443-8. doi: 10.3758/BF03197383.
3
Predicting reading performance from neuroimaging profiles: the cerebral basis of phonological effects in printed word identification.从神经影像特征预测阅读能力:印刷文字识别中语音效应的脑基础
Behav Res Methods. 2025 Jan 17;57(2):60. doi: 10.3758/s13428-024-02523-z.
4
Word Frequency and Predictability Dissociate in Naturalistic Reading.自然阅读中单词频率与可预测性相互分离。
Open Mind (Camb). 2024 Mar 5;8:177-201. doi: 10.1162/opmi_a_00119. eCollection 2024.
5
Word or pseudoword? The lexicality effect in naming and lexical decision tasks during advanced aging.单词还是伪词?高龄人群在命名和词汇判断任务中的词类效应。
PLoS One. 2024 Feb 29;19(2):e0299266. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0299266. eCollection 2024.
6
Eye movement corpora in Adyghe and Russian: an eye-tracking study of sentence reading in bilinguals.阿迪格语和俄语的眼动语料库:双语者句子阅读的眼动研究。
Front Psychol. 2023 Sep 13;14:1212701. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1212701. eCollection 2023.
7
Visual word recognition among oldest old people: The effect of age and cognitive load.高龄老人的视觉单词识别:年龄与认知负荷的影响。
Front Aging Neurosci. 2022 Sep 30;14:1007048. doi: 10.3389/fnagi.2022.1007048. eCollection 2022.
8
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.
9
Language Models Explain Word Reading Times Better Than Empirical Predictability.语言模型比经验可预测性能更好地解释单词阅读时间。
Front Artif Intell. 2022 Feb 2;4:730570. doi: 10.3389/frai.2021.730570. eCollection 2021.
10
The Beijing Sentence Corpus: A Chinese sentence corpus with eye movement data and predictability norms.北京句子语料库:具有眼动数据和可预测性规范的中文句子语料库。
Behav Res Methods. 2022 Aug;54(4):1989-2000. doi: 10.3758/s13428-021-01730-2. Epub 2021 Nov 23.
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1997 Apr;23(2):299-318. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.23.2.299.
4
Eye movement control in reading: a comparison of two types of models.阅读中的眼动控制:两种模型的比较
J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform. 1996 Oct;22(5):1188-200. doi: 10.1037//0096-1523.22.5.1188.
5
The influence of lexical and conceptual constraints on reading mixed-language sentences: evidence from eye fixations and naming times.词汇和概念限制对混合语言句子阅读的影响:来自眼动注视和命名时间的证据。
Mem Cognit. 1996 Jul;24(4):477-92. doi: 10.3758/bf03200936.
6
Mindless reading revisited: eye movements during reading and scanning are different.再探无意识阅读:阅读与浏览过程中的眼球运动有所不同。
Percept Psychophys. 1996 Jul;58(5):734-47. doi: 10.3758/bf03213106.
7
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.
8
Individual differences in reading subprocesses: relationships between reading ability, lexical access, and eye movement control.阅读子过程中的个体差异:阅读能力、词汇通达与眼动控制之间的关系。
Lang Speech. 1994 Jul-Sep;37 ( Pt 3):283-97. doi: 10.1177/002383099403700305.
9
A theory of reading: from eye fixations to comprehension.一种阅读理论:从眼动注视到阅读理解。
Psychol Rev. 1980 Jul;87(4):329-54.
10
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.