Observing neighborhood effects without neighbors

With a new metric called phonological Levenshtein distance (PLD20), the present study explores the effects of phonological similarity and word frequency on spoken word recognition, using polysyllabic words that have neither phonological nor orthographic neighbors, as defined by neighborhood density (the N-metric). Inhibitory effects of PLD20 were observed for these lexical hermits: Close-PLD20 words were recognized more slowly than distant PLD20 words, indicating lexical competition. Importantly, these inhibitory effects were found only for low- (not high-) frequency words, in line with previous findings that phonetically related primes inhibit recognition of low-frequency words. These results indicate that the properties of PLD20—a continuous measure of word-form similarity—make it a promising new metric for quantifying phonological distinctiveness in spoken word recognition research.

[1]  Melissa K. Stamer,et al.  Word Length and Lexical Competition: Longer is the Same as Shorter , 2008, Language and speech.

[2]  J. Ziegler,et al.  Neighborhood effects in auditory word recognition: Phonological competition and orthographic facilitation. , 2003 .

[3]  Duncan J. Watts,et al.  Collective dynamics of ‘small-world’ networks , 1998, Nature.

[4]  D. Balota,et al.  Visual word recognition of multisyllabic words , 2009 .

[5]  M. Vitevitch,et al.  The influence of the phonological neighborhood clustering coefficient on spoken word recognition. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[6]  Todd M. Bailey,et al.  Determinants of wordlikeness: Phonotactics or lexical neighborhoods? , 2001 .

[7]  James S. Magnuson,et al.  The Dynamics of Lexical Competition During Spoken Word Recognition , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[8]  P. Luce,et al.  A computational analysis of uniqueness points in auditory word recognition , 1986, Perception & psychophysics.

[9]  Lidia Suárez,et al.  Distributional analyses in auditory lexical decision: Neighborhood density and word-frequency effects , 2009, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  M. Vitevitch.  What can graph theory tell us about word learning and lexical retrieval? , 2008, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[11]  D. Pisoni,et al.  Recognizing Spoken Words: The Neighborhood Activation Model , 1998, Ear and hearing.

[12]  S. Goldinger,et al.  Priming Lexical Neighbors of Spoken Words: Effects of Competition and Inhibition. , 1989, Journal of memory and language.

[13]  D. Balota,et al.  Moving beyond Coltheart’s N: A new measure of orthographic similarity , 2008, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[14]  S. Goldinger,et al.  Phonetic priming, neighborhood activation, and PARSYN , 2000, Perception & psychophysics.

[15]  P. Luce,et al.  Probabilistic Phonotactics and Neighborhood Activation in Spoken Word Recognition , 1999 .

[16]  S. Goldinger,et al.  Form-based priming in spoken word recognition: the roles of competition and bias. , 1992, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition.

[17]  S. Andrews.  The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts , 1997 .

[18]  M. Vitevitch.  The spread of the phonological neighborhood influences spoken word recognition , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[19]  Martin Suter,et al.  Small World , 2002 .

[20]  Rebecca Treiman,et al.  The English Lexicon Project , 2007, Behavior research methods.