First in, first out: Word learning age and spoken word frequency as predictors of word familiarity and word naming latency

Abstract

This study is concerned with recent claims that subjective measures ofword frequency are more suitable than are standard word frequency counts as indices of actual frequency of word encounter. A multiple regression study is reported, which shows that the major predictor offamiliarity ratings is word learning age. Objective measures of spoken and written word frequency made independent contributions to the variance. It is concluded that rated familiarity is not an appropriate substitute for objective frequency measures. A multiple regression study of word naming latency is reported, and shows that rated word learning age is a better predictor ofword naming latency than are spoken word frequency, written word frequency, rated familiarity, and other variables. Possible theoretical explanations for age-of-acquisition effects are discussed and it is concluded that early-learned words have a more complete representation in a phonological output lexicon. This conclusion is related to relevant developmental literature.

Exploring a neural-network account of age-of-acquisition effects using repetition priming of faces

“…It would be expected, therefore, that the reaction times in these tasks would be predicted by some interaction between a word's frequency and how long it has been known (i.e., age of participantminus AoA). Carroll and White, however, failed to find such an interaction, and therefore, it has been concluded by others (e.g., Barry et al 1997;Brown & Watson, 1987) that AoA and frequency effects could not be explained by a single-stage account. Many subsequent studies of frequency and AoA effects have also failed to find an interaction between these factors (although there are some exceptions; e.g., Barry et al, 1997;Gerhand & Barry, 1999), and so single-stage accounts of AoA effects have often been dismissed.…”

“…Suggestions have included (1) a push-down memory store (Carroll & White, 1973), (2) lateralization of the development of language (H. D. Ellis & Young, 1977), and (3) the break up of later-learned words to fit into a limited phonological store (i.e., phonologicalcompleteness hypothesis; Brown & Watson, 1987). The latter explanationcontinues to enjoy popularity among researchers in the field (e.g., Barry, Hirsh, Johnston, & Williams, 2001).…”

Age of acquisition, word frequency, and the role of phonology in the lexical decision task

“…Familiarity correlates very highly with AoA; Gilhooly and Logie (1980) found that rated word familiarity correlates -.72 with rated AoA (earlyacquired words are rated to be more familiar). Brown and Watson (1987) suggested that people may actually base their subjective ratings of familiarity on how easily they can access the phonological characteristics of words. It may, therefore, be possible that previous studies showing effects of familiarity in the LDT have been confounded with effects due to AoA.…”

“…Currently, the most popular explanation of the AoA effect in picture and word naming is the phonological completeness hypothesis advanced by Brown and Watson (1987). This hypothesis proposes that the phonological forms of early-acquired words are stored in a relatively complete form in the speech output lexicon, whereas lateacquired words are stored in a more fragmentary fashion (and, indeed, may be structured around the more complete forms of early-acquired words).…”

Age of acquisition effects in picture naming: evidence for a lexical-semantic competition hypothesis

“…Two reasons why an AoA effect in picture naming may occur without an accompanying frequency effect have been proposed: The phonological completeness hypothesis (Brown & Watson, 1987) states that early learned words are stored holistically in the speech output lexicon, whereas later acquired words are stored in a fragmented way and must be assembled anew each time they are produced. The semantic hypothesis (Brysbaert, Van Wijnendaele, & De Deyne, 2000) says that the order of acquisition determines the speed with which the semantic representations of concepts can be activated, with early acquired concepts being more accessible than late-acquired concepts.…”