WordGen: A tool for word selection and nonword generation in Dutch, English, German, and French

  • Wouter Duyck
  • Timothy Desmet
  • Lieven P. C. Verbeke
  • Marc Brysbaert


WordGen is an easy-to-use program that uses the CELEX and Lexique lexical databases for word selection and nonword generation in Dutch, English, German, and French. Items can be generated in these four languages, specifying any combination of seven linguistic constraints: number of letters, neighborhood size, frequency, summated position-nonspecific bigram frequency, minimum position-nonspecific bigram frequency, position-specific frequency of the initial and final bigram, and orthographic relatedness. The program also has a module to calculate the respective values of these variables for items that have already been constructed, either with the program or taken from earlier studies. Stimulus queries can be entered through WordGen’s graphical user interface or by means of batch files. WordGen is especially useful for (1) Dutch and German item generation, because no such stimulus-selection tool exists for these languages, (2) the generation of nonwords for all four languages, because our program has some important advantages over previous nonword generation approaches, and (3) psycholinguistic experiments on bilingualism, because the possibility of using the same tool for different languages increases the cross-linguistic comparability of the generated item lists. WordGen is free and available athttp://expsy.ugent.be/wordgen.htm.

Supplementary material

Duyck-BRM-2004 link.txt (0 kb)
Supplementary material, approximately 340 KB.


  1. Andrews, S. (1989). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Activation or search?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15,802–814.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, S. (1992). Frequency and neighborhood effects on lexical access: Lexical similarity or orthographic redundancy?Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,18234–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baayen, R. H., Dijkstra, T. &Schreuder, R. (1997). Singulars and plurals in Dutch: Evidence for a parallel dual-route model.Journal of Memory & Language,37,94–117.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., &van Run, H. (1993).The CELEX lexical data base [CD-ROM]: Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  5. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., &van Run, H. (1995).The CELEX lexical data base [CD-ROM 2nd Release]: Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  6. Bertram, R., &Hyönä, J. (2003). The length of a complex word modifies the role of morphological structure: Evidence from eye movements when reading short and long Finnish compounds.Journal of Memory & Language,48, 615–634.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bonin, P., Chalard, M., Meot, A., &Fayol, M. (2001). Age-of-acquisition and word frequency in the lexical decision task: Further evidence from the French language.Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive/Current Psychology of Cognition,20, 401–443.Google Scholar
  8. Brysbaert, M. (2001). Prelexical phonological coding of visual words in Dutch: Automatic after all.Memory & Cognition,29,765–773.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Brysbaert, M., Lange, M., &Van Wijnendaele, I. (2000). The effects of age-of-acquisition and frequency-of-occurrence in visual word recognition: Further evidence from the Dutch language.European Journal of Cognitive Psychology,12,65–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Carroll, J. B., &White, M. N. (1973). Age of acquisition norms for 220 picturable nouns.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12,563–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chumbley, J. I., &Balota, D. A. (1984). A word’s meaning affects the decision in lexical decision.Memory & Cognition,12,590–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC psycholinguistic database.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,33(A), 497–505.Google Scholar
  13. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J. T., &Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VI (pp. 535–555). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  14. Damian, M. F., &Bowers, J. S. (2003). Effects of orthography on speech production in a form-preparation paradigm.Journal of Memory & Language,49, 119–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Förster, K. I., &Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12,627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Förster, K. I., &Veres, C. (1998). The prime lexicality effect: Form-priming as a function of prime-awareness, lexical status, and discrimination difficulty.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24,498–514.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Gerhand, S., &Barry, C. (1998). Word frequency effects in oral reading are not merely age-of-acquisition effects in disguise.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,24,267–283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Gernsbacher, M. A. (1984). Resolving 20 years of inconsistent interactions between lexical familiarity and orthography, concreteness, and polysemy.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,113,256–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Gilhooly, K. J. (1984). Word age-of-acquisition and residence time in lexical memory as factors in word naming.Current Psychological Research,3, 24–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Grainger, J. (1990). Word-frequency and neighborhood frequency-effects in lexical decision and naming.Journal of Memory & Language,29,228–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Grainger, J., &Ferrand, L. (1996). Masked orthographic and phonological priming in visual word recognition and naming: Cross-task comparisons.Journal of Memory & Language,35,623–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Howes, D. H., &Solomon, R. L. (1951). Visual duration threshold as a function of word probability.Journal of Experimental Psychology,41,401–410.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Izura, C., &Ellis, A. W. (2004). Age of acquisition effects in translation judgement tasks.Journal of Memory & Language,50, 165–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Locker, L., Jr.,Simpson, G. B., &Yates, M. (2003). Semantic neighborhood effects on the recognition of ambiguous words.Memory & Cognition,31,505–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Martensen, H., Maris, E., &Dijkstra, T. (2003). Phonological ambiguity and context sensitivity: On sublexical clustering in visual word recognition.Journal of Memory & Language,49, 375–395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McCann, R. S., &Besner, D. (1987). Reading pseudohomophones: Implications for models of pronunciation assembly and the locus of word frequency effects in naming.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,13,14–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Miller, K., &Swick, M. D. (2003). Orthography influences the perception of speech in alexic patients.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,15,981–990.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Morrison, C. M., &Ellis, A. W. (1995). Roles of word-frequency and age of acquisition in word naming and lexical decision.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,21,116–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. New, B., Brysbaert, M., Segui, J., Ferrand, L., &Rastle, K. (2004). The processing of singular and plural nouns in French and English.Journal of Memory & Language,51, 568–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. New, B., Pallier, C., Brysbaert, M., &Ferrand, L. (2004).Lexique 2: A new French lexical database.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,36,516–524.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Peereman, R., &Content, A. (1999). LEXOP: A lexical database providing orthography—phonology statistics for French monosyllabic words.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,31,376–379.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rastle, K., Harrington, J., &Coltheart, M. (2002). 358, 534 non-words: The ARC nonword database.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,55A,1339–1362.Google Scholar
  33. Rice, G. A., &Robinson, D. O. (1975). The role of bigram frequency in the perception of words and nonwords.Memory & Cognition,3, 513–518.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rumelhart, D. E., &Siple, P. (1974). Process of recognizing tachistoscopically presented words.Psychological Review,81,99–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Slowiaczek, L. M., Soltano, E. G., Wieting, S. J., &Bishop, K. L. (2003). An investigation of phonology and orthography in spoken-word recognition.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,56A,233–262.Google Scholar
  36. van Hell, J. G., &Dijkstra, T. (2002). Foreign language knowledge can influence native language performance in exclusively native contexts.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,9,780–789.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. van Heuven, W. J. B., Dijkstra, T., &Grainger, J. (1998). Orthographic neighborhood effects in bilingual word recognition.Journal of Memory & Language,39,458–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. van Heuven, W. J. B., Dijkstra, T., Grainger, J., &Schriefers, H. (2001). Shared neighborhood effects in masked orthographic priming.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,8,96–101.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Weekes, B. S. (1997). Differential effects of number of letters on word and nonword naming latency.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,50A, 439–456.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Westbury, C., &Buchanan, L. (2002). The probability of the least likely non—length-controlled bigram affects lexical decision reaction times.Brain & Language,81,66–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Whaley, C. P. (1978). Word—nonword classification time.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,17,143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Yates, M., Locker, L. Jr., &Simpson, G. B. (2003). Semantic and phonological influences on the processing of words and pseudohomophones.Memory & Cognition,31,856–866.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2004

Authors and Affiliations

  • Wouter Duyck
    • 1
  • Timothy Desmet
    • 1
  • Lieven P. C. Verbeke
    • 1
  • Marc Brysbaert
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  2. 2.Royal HollowayUniversity of LondonLondonEngland

Personalised recommendations