Behavior Research Methods

, Volume 42, Issue 3, pp 627–633 | Cite as

Wuggy: A multilingual pseudoword generator

  • Emmanuel Keuleers
  • Marc Brysbaert


Pseudowords play an important role in psycholinguistic experiments, either because they are required for performing tasks, such as lexical decision, or because they are the main focus of interest, such as in nonwordreading and nonce-inflection studies. We present a pseudoword generator that improves on current methods. It allows for the generation of written polysyllabic pseudowords that obey a given language’s phonotactic constraints. Given a word or nonword template, the algorithm can quickly generate pseudowords that match the template in subsyllabic structure and transition frequencies without having to search through a list with all possible candidates. Currently, the program is available for Dutch, English, German, French, Spanish, Serbian, and Basque, and, with little effort, it can be expanded to other languages.


Lexical Decision Lexical Decision Task Edit Distance Language Module Input Word 
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.


  1. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., & Gulikers, L. (1995). The CELEX lexical database (release 2) [CD-ROM]. Philadelphia: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  2. Balota, D. A., Yap, M. J., Cortese, M. J., Hutchison, K. A., Kessler, B., Loftis, B., et al. (2007). The English Lexicon Project. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 445–459.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Berko, J. (1958). The child’s learning of English morphology. Word, 14, 150–177.Google Scholar
  4. Borowsky, R., & Masson, M. E. J. (1996). Semantic ambiguity effects in word identification. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 22, 63–85. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.1.63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chumbley, J. I., & Balota, D. A. (1984). A word’s meaning affects the decision in lexical decision. Memory & Cognition, 12, 590–606.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Davis, C. J., & Perea, M. (2005). BuscaPalabras: A program for deriving orthographic and phonological neighborhood statistics and other psycholinguistic indices in Spanish. Behavior Research Methods, 37, 665–671.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Duyck, W., Desmet, T., Verbeke, L. P. C., & Brysbaert, M. (2004). WordGen: A tool for word selection and nonword generation in Dutch, English, German, and French. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36, 488–499.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gerhand, S., & Barry, C. (1999). Age-of-acquisition and frequency effects in speeded word naming. Cognition, 73, B27-B36.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ghyselinck, M., Lewis, M. B., & Brysbaert, M. (2004). Age of acquisition and the cumulative-frequency hypothesis: A review of the literature and a new multi-task investigation. Acta Psychologica, 115, 43–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Gibbs, P., & Van Orden, G. C. (1998). Pathway selection’s utility for control of word recognition. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance, 24, 1162–1187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kostić, Đ. (1999). Frekvencijski rěcnik savremenog srpskog jezika [Frequency dictionary of contemporary Serbian language]. Yugoslavia: University of Belgrade, Institute for Experimental Phonetics and Speech Pathology and Laboratory for Experimental Psychology.Google Scholar
  12. Medler, D. A., & Binder, J. R. (2005). MCWord: An on-line orthographic database of the English language. Available at www.neuro Scholar
  13. 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
  14. Perea, M., Urkia, M., Davis, C. J., Agirre, A., Laseka, E., & Carreiras, M. (2006). E-Hitz: A word frequency list and a program for deriving psycholinguistic statistics in an agglutinative language (Basque). Behavior Research Methods, 38, 610–615.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Rastle, K., & Brysbaert, M. (2006). Masked phonological priming effects in English: Are they real? Do they matter? Cognitive Psychology, 53, 97–145.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Rastle, K., Harrington, J., & Coltheart, M. (2002). 358,534 nonwords: The ARC nonword database. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 55A, 1339–1362.Google Scholar
  17. Ratcliff, R., Gomez, P., & McKoon, G. (2004). A diffusion model account of the lexical decision task. Psychological Review, 111, 159–182.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Reber, A. S. (1989). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 118, 219–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Yarkoni, T., Balota, D., & Yap, M. (2008). Moving beyond Coltheart’s N: A new measure of orthographic similarity. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 15, 971–979.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Experimental PsychologyGhent UniversityGhentBelgium

Personalised recommendations