Evidence for a Non-Lexical Influence on Children’s Auditory Repetition of Familiar Words

Abstract

This paper examines evidence for a nonlexical influence on children's repetition of real words. We investigate the extent to which two computational models of auditory repetition can simulate the performance of 68 children aged between 5 and 11 years-old when they are attempting to repeat familiar words. Both computational accounts were derived from Foygel and Dell's (J Mem Lang 43:182-216, 2000) semantic-phonological model of picture-naming. Results showed that a dual-route model in which a lexical and a nonlexical route work together to repeat familiar words (Hanley et al. in Cogn Neuropsychol 21:147-158, 2004) provided an accurate simulation of children's repetition, whereas Foygel and Dell (J Mem Lang 43:182-216, 2000) single lexical-route model under-predicted performance. The only exception was the repetition performance of 5 year-old children, which was over-predicted by the dual-route model. It is argued that at 5 years of age, some children have available both a lexical and a nonlexical repetition route but the output of the two routes does not summate when real words are being repeated. Some young children may lack the attentional skills that would enable them to co-ordinate the activity of the lexical and nonlexical repetition routes.

Perceptions of environmental changes and Lethargic crab disease among crab harvesters in a Brazilian coastal community

“…Orélis-Ribeiro et al [27], fulfilling the rigorous Koch postulates, concluded that the Exophiala cancerae species is the causative agent of LCD. His results support that the fungal agent is pathogenic and upheld the hypothesis of Boeger et al [12,15] that associated this fungus with LCD and the mass die offs of crabs.…”

“…Interestingly, while the interviewees could not name the disease that was infecting the crabs in the region, all of them could identify the major clinical symptoms of LCD. This inability to correctly name the disease is almost certainly due to the fact that it was only recognized and named by Boeger et al [15] (in reference to the lethargy demonstrated by infected crustaceans). These authors provided robust evidence suggesting that LCD is caused by an anamorph fungus and phylogenetic analyses have confirmed the diagnosis of the LCD fungus as an ascomycete (fungus of the phylum Ascomycota), and they suggest a close relationship with members of the subphylum Pezizomycotina.…”

“…This disease, which is specific to the crab species Ucides cordatus , is the first known disease caused by a fungus in crustaceans [14]. Due to the fact that numerous symptoms were shared by many crabs in areas with high mortality rates, such as lethargy, deficient motor control, and an incapacity to return to an upright position, this disease was given the name Lethargic Crab Disease (LCD) [15]. …”

How damaged brains repeat words: A computational approach

“…This variability, however, reflects the nature of the verbal stimulus, rather than brain damage. The nonlexical route is recruited when the item to be repeated is not part of the person's lexicon (as in learning a new language, or when the word is simply not known), and as such cannot be looked up in the production system (See also Budd, Hanley, & Nozari, 2012, for a report on the differential use of lexical-route and dual-route models innormally-developing children of different age groups).…”

Did I say dog or cat? A study of semantic error detection and correction in children

“…The S and P parameter strengths were estimated by fitting Foygel and Dell's model to the pattern of errors that each child made when naming the pictures (See Methods for details of model fitting). The success of this technique in estimating the strength of semantic and phonological processing in children's production system, and in detecting increases in the strength of the S and P parameters as children get older, has been previously established (Budd, Hanley & Griffiths, 2011;Budd, Hanley & Nozari, 2012). We then tested the model's prediction that the strength of S, but not P, should be predictive of the detection of semantic errors in the moving animals task.…”