Free associations and dominance ratings of homophones for young and older adults

Homophones are words that share phonology but differ in meaning and spelling (e.g.,beach, beech). This article presents the results of normative surveys that asked young and older adults to free associate to and rate the dominance of 197 homophones. Although norms exist for young adults on word familiarity and frequency for homophones, these results supplement the literature by (1) reporting the four most frequent responses to visually presented homophones for both young and older adults, and (2) reporting young and older adults’ ratings of homophone dominance. Results indicated that young and older adults gave the same first response to 67% of the homophones and rated homophone dominance similarly on 60% of the homophone sets. These results identify a subset of homophones that are preferable for research with young and older adults because of age-related equivalence in free association and dominance ratings. These norms can be downloaded from the Psychonomic Society’s Web archive,www.psychonomic.org/archive/.

[1]  D. Kausler,et al.  Orthographie distinctiveness of homonyms , 1971 .

[2]  Age differences in the commonality of free associations. , 1986, Experimental aging research.

[3]  A. Pollatsek,et al.  Automatic access of semantic information by phonological codes in visual word recognition. , 1993, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[4]  Gary G. Galbraith,et al.  Homophone units: A normative and methodological investigation of the strength of component elements , 1969 .

[5]  Gordon D. A. Brown.  A frequency count of 190,000 words in theLondon-Lund Corpus of English Conversation , 1984 .

[6]  Age differences in the consistency of adults' associative responses. , 1979, Experimental aging research.

[7]  D. Burke,et al.  Asymmetric aging effects on semantic and phonological processes: naming in the picture-word interference task. , 2002, Psychology and aging.

[8]  P. Witty.  The teacher's word book of 30,000 words. , 1945 .

[9]  D. Nelson,et al.  The University of South Florida homograph norms , 1980 .

[10]  Curt Burgess,et al.  Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence , 1996 .

[11]  G. Simpson.  Lexical ambiguity and its role in models of word recognition. , 1984, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  D. Howard.  Implicit and Explicit Assessment of Cognitive Aging , 1988 .

[13]  L W Poon,et al.  An analysis of the effect of aging on recognition memory. , 1982, Journal of gerontology.

[14]  G. Bower,et al.  Priming effects and recognition memory in young and elderly adults. , 1986, Experimental aging research.

[15]  M. Turvey,et al.  Visual lexical access is initially phonological: 1. Evidence from associative priming by words, homophones, and pseudohomophones. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[16]  G. C. Orden.  A ROWS is a ROSE: Spelling, sound, and reading , 1987 .

[17]  D. Kausler.  Orthographic Distinctiveness of Homonyms and the Feature-Tagging Hypothesis , 1973 .

[18]  John B. Carroll,et al.  The American Heritage Word Frequency Book , 1971 .

[19]  G. Stone,et al.  Reading homographs : Orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics , 1999 .

[20]  E. Lovelace,et al.  Free associations of older adults to single words and conceptually related word triads. , 1982, Journal of gerontology.

[21]  K. Forster,et al.  Lexical Access and Naming Time. , 1973 .

[22]  G. Kellas,et al.  Sources of sentence constraint on lexical ambiguity resolution , 1998, Memory & cognition.

[23]  P. Verhaeghen.  Aging and vocabulary scores: a meta-analysis. , 2003, Psychology and aging.

[24]  H. Dahl.  Word frequencies of spoken American English , 1979 .

[25]  Klaus F. Riegel,et al.  CHANGES IN ASSOCIATIVE BEHAVIOR DURING LATER YEARS OF LIFE: A CROSS-SECTIONAL ANALYSIS. , 1964, Vita humana. Internationale Zeitschrift fur Lebensaltersforschung. International journal of human development. Journal international de developpement humain.

[26]  S. Kemper,et al.  The structure of verbal abilities in young and older adults. , 2001, Psychology and aging.

[27]  P. Colombo,et al.  Lexical priming deficits as a function of age. , 1990, Behavioral neuroscience.

[28]  P. Dixon,et al.  University of Alberta norms of relative meaning frequency for 566 homographs , 1994, Memory & cognition.

[29]  C. Brainerd,et al.  Cognitive development in adulthood : progress in cognitive development research , 1988 .

[30]  D. Gorfein,et al.  Norms as a tool for the study of homography , 1982, Memory & cognition.

[31]  H. Kucera,et al.  Computational analysis of present-day American English , 1967 .

[32]  M. Perlmutter.  What Is Memory Aging the Aging Of , 1978 .

[33]  G O Stone,et al.  Reading homographs: orthographic, phonologic, and semantic dynamics. , 1999, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[34]  R. Kreuz,et al.  The subjective familiarity of English homophones , 1987, Memory & cognition.

[35]  D. Burke,et al.  Word associations in old age: evidence for consistency in semantic encoding during adulthood. , 1986, Psychology and aging.

[36]  Phonologically mediated priming of preexisting and new associations in young and older adults. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.