Behavior Research Methods

, Volume 39, Issue 3, pp 445–459 | Cite as

The English Lexicon Project

  • David A. BalotaEmail author
  • Melvin J. Yap
  • Keith A. Hutchison
  • Michael J. Cortese
  • Brett Kessler
  • Bjorn Loftis
  • James H. Neely
  • Douglas L. Nelson
  • Greg B. Simpson
  • Rebecca Treiman


The English Lexicon Project is a multiuniversity effort to provide a standardized behavioral and descriptive data set for 40,481 words and 40,481 nonwords. It is available via the Internet at Data from 816 participants across six universities were collected in a lexical decision task (approximately 3400 responses per participant), and data from 444 participants were collected in a speeded naming task (approximately 2500 responses per participant). The present paper describes the motivation for this project, the methods used to collect the data, and the search engine that affords access to the behavioral measures and descriptive lexical statistics for these stimuli.


Word Recognition Lexical Decision Lexical Decision Task Visual Word Recognition Lexical Processing 
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. Andrews, S. (1997). The effect of orthographic similarity on lexical retrieval: Resolving neighborhood conflicts.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,4, 439–461.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ans, B., Carbonnel, S., &Valdois, S. (1998). A connectionist multitrace memory model of polysyllabic word reading.Psychological Review,105, 678–723.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. Baayen, R. H., Piepenbrock, R., &van Rijn, H. (1993).The CELEX lexical database. Philadelphia, PA: Linguistic Data Consortium, University of Pennsylvania.Google Scholar
  4. Balota, D. A., &Chumbley, J. I. (1984). Are lexical decisions a good measure of lexical access? The role of word frequency in the neglected decision stage.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,10, 340–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Balota, D. A., &Chumbley, J. I. (1985). The locus of word-frequency effects in the pronunciation task: Lexical access and/or production?Journal of Memory & Language,24, 89–106.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Balota, D. A., Cortese, M. J., Sergent-Marshall, S. D., Spieler, D. H., &Yap, M. J. (2004). Visual word recognition of single-syllable words.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,133, 283–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Balota, D. A., &Spieler, D. H. (1998). The utility of item-level analyses in model evaluation: A reply to Seidenberg and Plaut.Psychological Science,9, 238–240.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Besner, D., & Bourassa, D. C. (1995, June).Localist and parallel processing models of visual word recognition: A few more words. Paper presented at the Brain Behavior, and Cognitive Science Society, Halifax, CA.Google Scholar
  9. Cattell, J. M. (1886). The time it takes to see and name objects.Mind,11, 63–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Centre for Speech Technology Research, University of Edinburgh. (n.d.).Unisyn lexicon [Data file]. Retrieved July 19, 2004, from Scholar
  11. Chateau, D., &Jared, D. (2003). Spelling-sound consistency effects in disyllabic word naming.Journal of Memory & Language,48, 255–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Coltheart, M., Davelaar, E., Jonasson, J., &Besner, D. (1977). Access to the internal lexicon. In S. Dornic (Ed.),Attention and performance VI (pp. 535–555). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  13. 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.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Cutler, A. (1981). Making up materials is a confounded nuisance, or: Will we be able to run any psycholinguistic experiments at all in 1990?Cognition,10, 65–70.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. Faust, M. E., Balota, D. A., Spieler, D. H., &Ferraro, F. R. (1999). Individual differences in information-processing rate and amount: Implications for group differences in response latency.Psychological Bulletin,125, 777–799.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. Forster, K. I. (2000). The potential for experimenter bias effects in word recognition experiments.Memory & Cognition,28, 1109–1115.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Grainger, J., &Jacobs, A. M. (1996). Orthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model.Psychological Review,103, 518–565.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. Horne, J. A., &Ostberg, O. (1976). A self-assessment questionnaire to determine morningness—eveningness in human circadian rhythms.International Journal of Chronobiology,4, 97–110.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. Jared, D., McRae, K., &Seidenberg, M. S. (1990). The basis of consistency effects in word naming.Journal of Memory & Language,29, 687–715.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Keefe, D. E., &Neely, J. H. (1990). Semantic priming in the pronunciation task: The role of prospective prime-generated expectancies.Memory & Cognition,18, 289–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kello, C. T. (2006). Considering the junction model of lexical processing. In S. Andrews (Ed.),From inkmarks to ideas: Current issues in lexical processing (pp. 50–75). New York: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
  22. Kessler, B., Treiman, R., &Mullennix, J. (2002). Phonetic biases in voice key response time measurements.Journal of Memory & Language,47, 145–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Kučera, H., &Francis, W. (1967).Computational analysis of presentday American English. Providence, RI: Brown University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Lund, K., &Burgess, C. (1996) Producing high-dimensional semantic spaces from lexical co-occurrence.Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers,28, 203–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. McClelland, J. L., &Rumelhart, D. E. (1981). An interactive activation model of context effects in letter perception: Part 1. An account of basic findings.Psychological Review,88, 375–407.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Neely, J. H. (1977). Semantic priming and retrieval from lexical memory: Roles of inhibitionless spreading activation and limited-capacity attention.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,106, 226–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Neely, J. H., Keefe, D. E., &Ross, K. L. (1989). Semantic priming in the lexical decision task: Roles of prospective prime-generated expectancies and retrospective semantic matching.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition,15, 1003–1019.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. New, B., Ferrand, L., Pallier, C., &Brysbaert, M. (2006). Reexamining word length effects in visual word recognition: New evidence from the English Lexicon Project.Psychonomic Bulletin & Review,13, 45–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Petersen, S. E., Fox, P. T., Posner, M. I., Mintun, M., &Raichle, M. E. (1989). Positron emission tomographic studies of the processing of single words.Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience,1, 153–170.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Plaut, D. C., McClelland, J. L., Seidenberg, M. S., &Patterson, K. (1996). Understanding normal and impaired word reading: Computational principles in quasi-regular domains.Psychological Review,103, 56–115.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  31. Seidenberg, M. S., &McClelland, J. L. (1989). A distributed developmental model of word recognition and naming.Psychological Review,96, 523–568.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. Seidenberg, M. S., & Waters, G. S. (1989, November).Naming words aloud: A mega-study. Paper presented at the meeting of the Psychonomic Society, Atlanta, GA.Google Scholar
  33. Shipley, W. C. (1940). A self-administering scale for measuring intellectual impairment and deterioration.Journal of Psychology,9, 371–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Spieler, D. H., &Balota, D. A. (1997). Bringing computational models of word naming down to the item level.Psychological Science,8, 411–416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Stroop, J. R. (1935). Studies of interference in serial verbal reactions.Journal of Experimental Psychology,18, 643–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Taraban, R., &McClelland, J. L. (1987). Conspiracy effects in word pronunciation.Journal of Memory & Language,26, 608–631.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Treiman, R., Mullennix, J., Bijeljac-Babic, R., &Richmond-Welty, E. D. (1995). The special role of rimes in the description, use, and acquisition of English orthography.Journal of Experimental Psychology: General,124, 107–136.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Zevin, J. D., &Seidenberg, M. S. (2002). Age of acquisition effects in word reading and other tasks.Journal of Memory & Language,47, 1–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Zorzi, M., Houghton, G., &Butterworth, B. (1998). Two routes or one in reading aloud? A connectionist dual-process model.Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception & Performance,24, 1131–1161.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Psychonomic Society, Inc. 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • David A. Balota
    • 1
    Email author
  • Melvin J. Yap
    • 1
  • Keith A. Hutchison
    • 2
  • Michael J. Cortese
    • 3
  • Brett Kessler
    • 1
  • Bjorn Loftis
    • 1
  • James H. Neely
    • 4
  • Douglas L. Nelson
    • 5
  • Greg B. Simpson
    • 6
  • Rebecca Treiman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyWashington UniversitySt. LouisMissouri
  2. 2.College of CharlestonCharlestonSouth Carolina
  3. 3.Montana State UniversityBozemanMontana
  4. 4.University at AlbanyState University of New YorkAlbanyNew York
  5. 5.University of South FloridaTampaFlorida
  6. 6.Washington UniversitySt. LouisMissouri

Personalised recommendations