A cross-sectional comparison of the effects of phonotactic probability and neighborhood density on word learning by preschool children

The Effects of Phonotactic Probability and Neighborhood Density on Adults' Word Learning in Noisy Conditions

“…As with low phonotactic probability, words with low density may be more easily identified as novel, potentially leading to more efficient triggering of word learning. This convergence of low probability and low density for adults in conditions of noise mirrors what has been found in preschool children under optimal listening conditions (Hoover et al, 2010). Thus, when word learning is challenging due to lack of word learning experience (i.e., children) or environmental perturbations (i.e., noise), low probability and low density may be optimal for recognizing an input word as novel and efficiently triggering learning.…”

“…Words with high probability and high density are more likely to be held accurately and/or longer in working memory due to activation of sound sequences and similar-sounding words in long-term memory (Gathercole et al, 1999;Thomson et al, 2005). As with the convergence of low probability and low density for adults in noise, this convergence of high probability and high density for adults in noise mirrors what has been found in preschool children under optimal listening conditions (Hoover et al, 2010). Thus, when word learning is challenging due to lack of word learning experience or environmental perturbations, high probability and high density may be optimal for holding recently heard sound sequences in working memory, facilitating the creation of a new representation of the novel word in long-term memory.…”

“…With regard to the stages of word learning, the number of exposures could be used to distinguish the stage of word learning, triggering versus configuration, that is being tapped, and this approach has been used in studies of child word learning (Hoover et al, 2010). However, the results of the current study reveal no interactions involving exposure, which indicates that these early and later stages may not be discrete in adults in noisy conditions but rather may be overlapping and more integrated.…”

“…This study used the same novel object referents as those used in Hoover, Storkel, and Hogan (2010), Storkel (2004a), and Storkel et al (2006). Some of these novel objects were adapted from children's stories, and others were created.…”

Differentiating word learning processes may yield new insights – a commentary on Stoel-Gammon's ‘Relationships between lexical and phonological development in young children’

“…A recent series of studies differentiating the role of PHONOTACTIC PROBABILITY, the likelihood of occurrence of a sound sequence, from that of NEIGHBORHOOD DENSITY, the number of phonologically similar words, showed somewhat surprising results. Specifically, phonotactic probability interacted with neighborhood density such that low probability/low density nonwords and high probability/high density nonwords were learned more accurately than the two mixed conditions of low probability/high density and high probability/low density (Hoover, Storkel, & Hogan, 2010).…”