On the predictive validity of various corpus-based frequency norms in L2 English lexical processing

Abstract

The predictive validity of various corpus-based frequency norms in first-language lexical processing has been intensively investigated in previous research, but less attention has been paid to this issue in second-language (L2) processing. To bridge the gap, in the present study we took English as a case in point and compared the predictive power of a large set of corpus-based frequency norms for the performance of an L2 English visual lexical decision task (LDT). Our results showed that, in general, the frequency norms from SUBTLEX-US and WorldLex-Blog tended to predict L2 performance better in reaction times, whereas the frequency norms from corpora with a mixture of written and spoken genres (CELEX, WorldLex-Blog, BNC, ANC, and COCA) tended to predict L2 accuracy better. Although replicated in both low- and high-proficiency L2 English learners, these patterns were not exactly the same as those found in LDT data from native English speakers. In addition, we only observed some limited advantages of the lemma frequency and contextual diversity measures over the wordform frequency measure in predicting L2 lexical processing. The results of the present study, especially the detailed comparisons among the different corpora, provide methodological implications for future L2 lexical research.

Component processes in free-viewing visual search: Insights from fixation-aligned pupillary response averaging

“…From a more general standpoint, a limitation of this data-driven approach to correcting pupil data is its implicit assumption that pupil size does not actually depend on gaze position and that any observed relationship is consequently artifactual. As Mathôt, Fabius, Van Heusden, & Van der Stigchel (2018) point out, this assumption may be flawed. For example, if participants are required to make uncomfortable eye movements to foveate extreme parts of the screen, the pupil may dilate because of the mental and physical effort involved with this action.…”

Implying social interaction and its influence on gaze behavior to the eyes

“…systematic error) for the remaining 68 participants by measuring the difference between the average fixation location and the calibration point (averaged over participants and calibration points). The systematic error was found to be 0.65o n average (for more details, see [53]). We concluded that data quality for the remaining 68 participants was adequate for the subsequent analyses, because the average systematic error was approximately three times as low as the average AOI span of 2.035˚(see Method section).…”

“…When the operator was ready, the participant would take place in the chinrest and the black cloth was draped over the participant. Reprinted from [53] with permission.…”

Integrating Differential Evolution Optimization to Cognitive Diagnostic Model Estimation

“…Traditionally, estimating LCDMs refers to the expectation maximization (EM) algorithm (Bock and Aitkin, 1981 ) that maximizes the marginal likelihood; this is the most commonly-seen algorithm in the CDM literature. In addition to the EM algorithm, Markov chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) techniques can be, theoretically, used to estimate the LCDM, but to date its application remains upon simpler CDMs such as the DINA model (da Silva et al, 2017 ; Jiang and Carter, 2018a ). This study focuses on the EM algorithm due to its practicality and popularity.…”

“…To compare the estimates with other estimation approaches, we also implemented a Bayesian technique-Hamiltonian Monte Carlo-to the analysis by adopting uninformative priors for both item parameters and the class membership probability: the mean and standard deviation for item parameters were 0 and 20, while the Dirichelet prior parameters were all set to 1 (see Jiang and Carter, 2018a for details). The correlations of item parameter estimates were relatively high: 0.77, 0.84, and 0.69 for intercept, main effect, and interaction effects.…”