Advertisement

Behavior Research Methods

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 65–70 | Cite as

N-Watch: A program for deriving neighborhood size and other psycholinguistic statistics

  • Colin J. Davis
Article

Abstract

This article describes a Windows program that enables users to obtain a broad range of statistics concerning the properties of word and nonword stimuli, including measures of word frequency, orthographic similarity, orthographic and phonological structure, age of acquisition, and imageability. It is designed for use by researchers in psycholinguistics, particularly those concerned with recognition of isolated words. The program computes measures of orthographic similarity on line, either with respect to a default vocabulary of 30,605 words or to a vocabulary specified by the user. In addition to providing standard orthographic neighborhood measures, the program can be used to obtain information about other forms of orthographic similarity, such as transposed-letter similarity and embedded-word similarity. It is available, free of charge, from the following Web site: http://www.maccs.mq.edu.au/≈colin/N-Watch/.

Keywords

Lexical Decision Word Frequency Letter String Orthographic Neighbor Output Field 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Andrews, S. (1996). Lexical retrieval and selection processes: Effects of transposed-letter confusability.Journal of Memory & Language,35, 775–800.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Andrews, S. (1997). The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 439–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., &van Rijn, H. (1995).The CELEX Lexical Database. Release 2 [CD-ROM]. Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.Google Scholar
  4. Balota, D. A., Pilotti, M., &Cortese, M. J. (2001). Subjective frequency estimates for 2,938 monosyllabic words.Memory & Cognition,29, 639–647.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Bird, H., Franklin, S., &Howard, D. (2001). Age of acquisition and imageability ratings for a large set of words, including verbs and function words.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,33, 73–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bowers, J. S., Davis, C. J., & Hanley, D. (2003).Automatic semantic activation of embedded words: Is there a “hat” in “that?” Manuscript submitted for publication.Google Scholar
  7. Brown, G. D., &Watson, F. L. (1987). First in, first out: Word learning age and spoken word frequency as predictors of word familiarity and naming latency.Memory & Cognition,15, 208–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carroll, J. B., &White, M. N. (1973). Word frequency and age of acquisition as determiners of picture-naming latency.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,25, 85–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chambers, S. M. (1979). Letter and order information in lexical access.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,18, 225–241.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Coltheart, M. (1981). The MRC Psycholinguistic Database.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,33A, 497–505.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 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). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  12. Coltheart, M., Rastle, K., Perry, C., Langdon, R., &Ziegler, J. (2001). DRC: A dual-route cascaded model of visual word recognition and reading aloud.Psychological Review,108, 204–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Davis, C. J., & Taft, M. (in press). More words in the neighborhood: Interference in lexical decision due to deletion neighbors.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review.Google Scholar
  14. Dennis, S. (1995). The Sydney Morning Herald Word Database.Noetica: Open Forum,1. Available at http://psy.uq.edu.au/cogpsych/noetica/.Google Scholar
  15. Forster, K. I., &Chambers, S. M. (1973). Lexical access and naming time.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,12, 627–635.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 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
  17. Gilhooly, K. J., &Logie, R. H. (1980). Age-of-acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity and ambiguity measures for 1,944 words.Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation,12, 395–427.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Grainger, J., O’Regan, J. K., Jacobs, A. M., &Segui, J. (1989). On the role of competing word units in visual word recognition: The neighborhood frequency effect.Perception & Psychophysics,45, 189–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. James, C. T. (1975). The role of semantic information in lexical decisions.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,1, 130–136.Google Scholar
  20. Kučera, H., &Francis, W. N. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
  21. McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: I. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Monsell, S., Doyle, M. C., &Haggard, P. N. (1989). Effects of frequency on visual word recognition tasks: Where are they?Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,118, 43–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Morrison, C. M., Chappell, T. D., &Ellis, A. W. (1997). Age of acquisition norms for a large set of object names and their relation to adult estimates and other variables.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,50A, 528–559.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 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, 116–153.Google Scholar
  25. Oldfield, R. C., &Wingfield, A. (1965). Response latencies in naming objects.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology,17, 273–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C., &Madigan, S. A. (1968). Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns.Journal of Experimental Psychology Monographs,76(Suppl. 2), 1–25.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Pugh, K. R., Rexer, K., &Katz, L. (1994). Evidence of flexible coding in visual word recognition.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,20, 807–825.Google Scholar
  28. Rastle, K., Harrington, J., &Coltheart, M. (2002). 358,534 nonwords: The ARC nonword database.Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psycholog,55A, 1339–1362.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Taft, M., &van Graan, F. (1998). Lack of phonological mediation in a semantic categorization task.Journal of Memory & Language,38, 203–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Toglia, M. P., &Battig, W. R. (1978).Handbook of semantic word norms. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  31. Whaley, C. P. (1978). Word-nonword classification time.Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior,17, 143–154.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2005

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Macquarie UniversitySydneyAustralia

Personalised recommendations