Bringing Computational Models of Word Naming Down to the Item Level

Early noncomputational models of word recognition have typically attempted to account for effects of categorical factors such as word frequency (high vs low) and spelling-to-sound regularity (regular vs irregular) More recent computational models that adhere to general connectionist principles hold the promise of being sensitive to underlying item differences that are only approximated by these categorical factors In contrast to earlier models, these connectionist models provide predictions of performance for individual items In the present study, we used the item-level estimates from two connectionist models (Plaut, McClelland, Seidenberg, & Patterson, 1996, Seidenberg & McClelland, 1989) to predict naming latencies on the individual items on which the models were trained The results indicate that the models capture, at best, slightly more variance than simple log frequency and substantially less than the combined predictive power of log frequency, neighborhood density, and orthographic length. The discussion focuses on the importance of examining the item-level performance of word-naming models and possible approaches that may improve the models' sensitivity to such item differences

[1]  Paul W. B. Atkins,et al.  Models of reading aloud: Dual-route and parallel-distributed-processing approaches. , 1993 .

[2]  James L. McClelland,et al.  More Words but Still No Lexicon: Reply to Besner et al. (1990) , 1990 .

[3]  D. Balota,et al.  The locus of word-frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access and/or production? ☆ , 1985 .

[4]  E. B. Huey The Psychology And Pedagogy Of Reading , 1908 .

[5]  Marilyn Jager Adams,et al.  Models of Reading , 1982 .

[6]  Ken N. Seergobin,et al.  On the association between connectionism and data: Are a few words necessary? , 1990 .

[7]  Michael C. Doyle,et al.  Effects of frequency on visual word recognition tasks: where are they? , 1989, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  Michael Garman,et al.  Psycholinguistics: Accessing the mental lexicon , 1990 .

[9]  D. Balota,et al.  Where are the effects of frequency in visual word recognition tasks? Right where we said they were! Comment on Monsell, Doyle, and Haggard (1989). , 1990, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[10]  James L. McClelland On the time relations of mental processes: An examination of systems of processes in cascade. , 1979 .

[11]  Pseudohomophone effects and models of word recognition. , 1996 .

[12]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings. , 1981 .

[13]  James L. McClelland,et al.  A distributed, developmental model of word recognition and naming. , 1989, Psychological review.

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

[15]  John J. L. Morton,et al.  Interaction of information in word recognition. , 1969 .

[16]  James L. McClelland,et al.  Understanding normal and impaired word reading: computational principles in quasi-regular domains. , 1996, Psychological review.

[17]  James L. McClelland,et al.  More Words but Still No Lexicon : Reply to Besner et al . ( 1990 ) , 1990 .

[18]  Mark S. Seidenberg,et al.  The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[19]  James L. McClelland,et al.  An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: part 1.: an account of basic findings , 1988 .

[20]  R A Abrams,et al.  Mental chronometry: beyond onset latencies in the lexical decision task. , 1995, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[21]  Max Coltheart,et al.  Access to the internal lexicon , 1977 .