A database of 629 English compound words: ratings of familiarity, lexeme meaning dominance, semantic transparency, age of acquisition, imageability, and sensory experience

Since the work of Taft and Forster (1976), a growing literature has examined how English compound words are recognized and organized in the mental lexicon. Much of this research has focused on whether compound words are decomposed during recognition by manipulating the word frequencies of their lexemes. However, many variables may impact morphological processing, including relational semantic variables such as semantic transparency, as well as additional form-related and semantic variables. In the present study, ratings were collected on 629 English compound words for six variables [familiarity, age of acquisition (AoA), semantic transparency, lexeme meaning dominance (LMD), imageability, and sensory experience ratings (SER)]. All of the compound words selected for this study are contained within the English Lexicon Project (Balota et al., 2007), which made it possible to use a regression approach to examine the predictive power of these variables for lexical decision and word naming performance. Analyses indicated that familiarity, AoA, imageability, and SER were all significant predictors of both lexical decision and word naming performance when they were added separately to a model containing the length and frequency of the compounds, as well as the lexeme frequencies. In addition, rated semantic transparency also predicted lexical decision performance. The database of English compound words should be beneficial to word recognition researchers who are interested in selecting items for experiments on compound words, and it will also allow researchers to conduct further analyses using the available data combined with word recognition times included in the English Lexicon Project.

[1]  Gary Libben,et al.  Everything is Psycholinguistics: Material and Methodological Considerations in the Study of Compound Processing , 2005, Canadian Journal of Linguistics/Revue canadienne de linguistique.

[2]  L. Feldman Modeling Morphological Processing , 2013 .

[3]  David Poeppel,et al.  Compound words and structure in the lexicon , 2007 .

[4]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  The effects of morphology on the processing of compound words: evidence from naming, lexical decisions and eye fixations. , 2003, British journal of psychology.

[5]  Sachiko Kinoshita,et al.  Masked priming : the state of the art , 2003 .

[6]  J. Hyönä,et al.  The length of a complex word modifies the role of morphological structure: Evidence from eye movements when reading short and long Finnish compounds , 2003 .

[7]  M. Gernsbacher Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy. , 1984, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  David A. Balota,et al.  Bringing Computational Models of Word Naming Down to the Item Level , 1997 .

[9]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Reexamining the word length effect in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project , 2006, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[10]  D C Rubin,et al.  Predicting which words get recalled: Measures of free recall, availability, goodness, emotionality, and pronunciability for 925 nouns , 1986, Memory & cognition.

[11]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Age-of-acquisition effects in word and picture identification. , 2005, Psychological bulletin.

[12]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Eye movements and the use of parafoveal word length information in reading. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[13]  Gary Libben,et al.  Semantic Transparency in the Processing of Compounds: Consequences for Representation, Processing, and Impairment , 1998, Brain and Language.

[14]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Effect of relation availability on the interpretation and access of familiar noun–noun compounds , 2004, Brain and Language.

[15]  Keith Rayner,et al.  The role of interword spaces in the processing of English compound words , 2005 .

[16]  Marco Marelli,et al.  Frequency Effects in the Processing of Italian Nominal Compounds: Modulation of Headedness and Semantic Transparency , 2012 .

[17]  R. Baayen,et al.  Morphological influences on the recognition of monosyllabic monomorphemic words , 2006 .

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

[19]  Michael J. Cortese,et al.  Imageability estimates for 3,000 disyllabic words , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.

[20]  R. Johnston,et al.  Age of acquisition and lexical processing , 2006 .

[21]  Robin L. Hill,et al.  Eye movements : a window on mind and brain , 2007 .

[22]  A. Pollatsek,et al.  Reading Finnish compound words: eye fixations are affected by component morphemes. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[23]  Joshua B. Tenenbaum,et al.  The Large-Scale Structure of Semantic Networks: Statistical Analyses and a Model of Semantic Growth , 2001, Cogn. Sci..

[24]  Naveed A. Sheikh,et al.  Sensorimotor and linguistic information attenuate emotional word processing benefits: an eye-movement study. , 2013, Emotion.

[25]  W. F. Battig,et al.  Handbook of semantic word norms , 1978 .

[26]  Curt Burgess,et al.  The effect of corpus size in predicting reaction time in a basic word recognition task: Moving on from Kučera and Francis , 1998 .

[27]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Sensory experience ratings for over 5,000 mono- and disyllabic words , 2013, Behavior research methods.

[28]  P. Atchley,et al.  Conjunction errors, recollection-based rejections, and forgetting in a continuous recognition task. , 2006, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[29]  Victor Kuperman,et al.  Moving spaces: Spelling alternation in English noun-noun compounds , 2013 .

[30]  Marianne Lloyd Reducing the familiarity of conjunction lures with pictures. , 2013, Journal of Experimental Psychology. Learning, Memory and Cognition.

[31]  Laurie Beth Feldman,et al.  Morphological aspects of language processing. , 1997 .

[32]  R. Logie,et al.  Age-of-acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity, and ambiguity measures for 1,944 words , 1980 .

[33]  C. Rotello,et al.  Conjunction errors and semantic transparency , 2010, Memory & cognition.

[34]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Age of acquisition predicts naming and lexical-decision performance above and beyond 22 other predictor variables: An analysis of 2,342 words , 2007, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[35]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Recognition memory for 2,578 monosyllabic words , 2010, Memory.

[36]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Tangible Words are Recognized Faster: The Grounding of Meaning in Sensory and Perceptual Systems , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[37]  W. Marslen-Wilson,et al.  Morphology and meaning in the English mental lexicon. , 1994 .

[38]  J. V. van Berkum,et al.  How robust is the language architecture? The case of mood , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[39]  H. J. Jaarsveld,et al.  Frequency effects in the processing of lexicalized and novel nominal compounds , 1988 .

[40]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  The influence of semantic transparency on eye movements during English compound word recognition , 2007 .

[41]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  Moving beyond Kučera and Francis: A critical evaluation of current word frequency norms and the introduction of a new and improved word frequency measure for American English , 2009, Behavior research methods.

[42]  D. Balota,et al.  A word’s meaning affects the decision in lexical decision , 1984, Memory & cognition.

[43]  Marc Brysbaert,et al.  The British Lexicon Project: Lexical decision data for 28,730 monosyllabic and disyllabic English words , 2011, Behavior Research Methods.

[44]  Matthew A. Lambon Ralph,et al.  Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: insights from connectionist networks. , 2000 .

[45]  A. Inhoff,et al.  Compound word effects differ in reading, on-line naming, and delayed naming tasks , 1996, Memory & cognition.

[46]  Steven Pack,et al.  Benefits and costs. , 2005, Nursing standard (Royal College of Nursing (Great Britain) : 1987).

[47]  R. Harald Baayen,et al.  Morphological dynamics in compound processing , 2008 .

[48]  Penny M. Pexman,et al.  Evidence for the activation of sensorimotor information during visual word recognition: The body–object interaction effect , 2008, Cognition.

[49]  Barbara J. Juhasz Sentence context modifies compound word recognition: Evidence from eye movements , 2012 .

[50]  A. Paivio,et al.  Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. , 1968, Journal of experimental psychology.

[51]  Keith Rayner,et al.  Investigating the effects of a set of intercorrelated variables on eye fixation durations in reading. , 2003, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[52]  P. Atchley,et al.  Conjunction error rates on a continuous recognition memory test: little evidence for recollection. , 2002, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[53]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Visual word recognition of single-syllable words. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[54]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Age of acquisition estimates for 3,000 disyllabic words , 2012, Behavior Research Methods.

[55]  A. Krott,et al.  Large constituent families help children parse compounds , 2005, Journal of Child Language.

[56]  T. Odegard,et al.  Robust recollection rejection in the memory conjunction paradigm. , 2004, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[57]  Dominiek Sandra,et al.  On the Representation and Processing of Compound Words: Automatic Access to Constituent Morphemes Does Not Occur , 1990 .

[58]  M. Paulshock,et al.  Frequency of effects. , 1984, Hospital practice.

[59]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Imageability and age of acquisition effects in disyllabic word recognition , 2013, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[60]  Alan S. Brown,et al.  Feature and conjunction effects in recognition memory: Toward specifying familiarity for compound words , 2007, Memory & cognition.

[61]  Gary Libben,et al.  Processing Compounds: A Cross-Linguistic Study , 1999, Brain and Language.

[62]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Age of acquisition ratings for 3,000 monosyllabic words , 2008, Behavior research methods.

[63]  Daragh E. Sibley,et al.  Individual Differences in Visual Word Recognition: Insights from the English Lexicon Project , 2012 .

[64]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Benefits and costs of lexical decomposition and semantic integration during the processing of transparent and opaque English compounds , 2011 .

[65]  M. Brysbaert,et al.  Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30,000 English words , 2012, Behavior research methods.

[66]  Victor Kuperman,et al.  Accentuate the Positive: Semantic Access in English Compounds , 2013, Front. Psychol..

[67]  A. Ellis Progress in the psychology of language , 1985 .

[68]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  The role of semantic transparency in the processing of Finnish compound words , 2005 .

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

[70]  Ben D. Amsel,et al.  Perceptual and motor attribute ratings for 559 object concepts , 2012, Behavior Research Methods.

[71]  Keith Rayner,et al.  Letter transpositions within and across morphemes. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[72]  A. Paivio Imagery and verbal processes , 1972 .

[73]  Keith Rayner,et al.  Eye movements and parafoveal preview of compound words: Does morpheme order matter? , 2013, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[74]  Robert Fiorentino,et al.  Masked morphological priming of compound constituents , 2009 .

[75]  M. L. Lambon Ralph,et al.  Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: insights from connectionist networks. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[76]  D. Cicchetti Guidelines, Criteria, and Rules of Thumb for Evaluating Normed and Standardized Assessment Instruments in Psychology. , 1994 .

[77]  Pienie Zwitserlood,et al.  The role of semantic transparency in the processing and representation of Dutch compounds , 1994 .

[78]  S. Andrews,et al.  Eye movements and morphological segmentation of compound words: There is a mouse in mousetrap , 2004 .

[79]  Allan Paivio,et al.  Extensions of the Paivio, Yuille, and Madigan (1968) norms , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[80]  A. Pollatsek,et al.  The role of morphological constituents in reading Finnish compound words. , 2000, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[81]  S. Andrews Morphological influences on lexical access: Lexical or nonlexical effects? , 1986 .

[82]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Relation priming in established compounds: facilitation? , 2011, Memory & cognition.

[83]  Lee H. Wurm,et al.  Lexical dynamics for low-frequency complex words: A regression study across tasks and modalities , 2007 .

[84]  Sally Andrews,et al.  Racehorses, reindeer, and sparrows: Using masked priming to investigate morphological influences on compound word identification , 2003 .

[85]  R. Baayen,et al.  Reading polymorphemic Dutch compounds: toward a multiple route model of lexical processing. , 2009, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[86]  C. L. Cushman,et al.  Age-of-Acquisition Effects in Pure Alexia , 2011, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[87]  M. Carreiras,et al.  The role of the frequency of constituents in compound words: Evidence from Basque and Spanish , 2007, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[88]  Christina L. Gagné,et al.  Constituent integration during the processing of compound words: Does it involve the use of relational structures? , 2009 .

[89]  K. Forster,et al.  Lexical storage and retrieval of polymorphemic and polysyllabic words. , 1976 .

[90]  Lars Placke,et al.  Eye movements during the reading of compound words and the influence of lexeme meaning , 2008, Memory & cognition.

[91]  Davide Crepaldi,et al.  Seeing stems everywhere: position-independent identification of stem morphemes. , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[92]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Effects of morphological families on English compound word recognition: A multitask investigation , 2011 .

[93]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  Parafoveal processing within and between words , 2009, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[94]  Michael J Cortese,et al.  Imageability ratings for 3,000 monosyllabic words , 2004, Behavior research methods, instruments, & computers : a journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc.

[95]  Robert Schreuder,et al.  The Processing and Representation of Dutch and English Compounds: Peripheral Morphological and Central Orthographic Effects , 2002, Brain and Language.

[96]  Alexander Pollatsek,et al.  The role of semantic transparency in the processing of English compound words. , 2008, British journal of psychology.

[97]  Gary Libben,et al.  Compound fracture: The role of semantic transparency and morphological headedness , 2003, Brain and Language.

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

[99]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  The processing of compound words in English: Effects of word length on eye movements during reading , 2008 .

[100]  Kevin A Hallgren,et al.  Computing Inter-Rater Reliability for Observational Data: An Overview and Tutorial. , 2012, Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology.

[101]  Robin K. Morris,et al.  Eye movements, word familiarity, and vocabulary acquisition , 2004 .

[102]  Barbara J. Juhasz,et al.  Parafoveal processing during reading is reduced across a morphological boundary , 2010, Cognition.