Age of acquisition

Last updated

Age of acquisition (AOA or AoA) is a psycholinguistic variable referring to the age at which a word is typically learned. For example, the word 'penguin' is typically learned at a younger age than the word 'albatross'. Studies in psycholinguistics suggest that age of acquisition has an effect on the speed of reading words. [1] [2] The findings have demonstrated that early-acquired words are processed more quickly than later-acquired words. [3] [4] [5] It is a particularly strong variable in predicting the speed of picture naming. [6] [7] It has been generally found that words that are more frequent, shorter, more familiar and refer to concrete concepts are learned earlier than the counterparts in simple words [8] and compound words, together with their respective lexemes. [9] In addition, the AoA effect has been demonstrated in several languages [10] [11] and in bilingual speakers. [12] [13]

Contents

Norms

Sets of normative values for age of acquisition for large sets of words have been developed.

Relation to other variables

It has been disputed whether age of acquisition has an effect on word tasks on its own or by virtue of its covariance with other variables such as word frequency. [19] Alternatively, it has been suggested that the age of acquisition is related to the fact that an earlier learned word has been encountered more often. [20] These issues were partially resolved in an article by Ghyselinck, Lewis and Brysbaert. [21] [ further explanation needed ]

Alternatively there have been discussions of the effect that the age of acquisition has on memory. [22] [23] [24] [25] The influence of AoA on recognition memory is likely to be present, using a pure and mixed lists. [22] [23] [24] However, the AoA effect is not likely to be present in free recall tasks. [23] However, there is evidence indicating that the AoA is present in free recall in compound words. [25] One explanation for this is that disyllabic words such as compound words have more irregular spelling-to-sound correspondence, thus semantics is more likely to take place, while monomorphemic items have a more regular spelling-to-sound correspondence, thus semantics is less likely to take place. [26]

Theories on the age-of-acquisition effects

Representation theory

The AoA effects could be attributed to incremental construction of semantic representations. [27] [28] Early-acquired words develop stronger connections with other words as they have richer semantic representations, and are thus more resistant to cognitive impairment. [29]

Mapping theory

The AoA effects result from reduced neuroplasticity during the learning of mappings between representations over time. [30] [31] Early-acquired words use the rich resources available in the system, while late-acquired words need to fitted into the system already tuned to early-acquired words. Consequently, there is a processing cost for late-acquired words, especially for those having mapping structures that are different to early-acquired words. [32] [33] Opaque or deep languages such as English are more likely to show AoA effects, as a result of this mapping between letter and sound being irregular in opaque languages, leading to a larger AoA effects, whereas transparent or shallow languages such as Spanish are more likely to demonstrate small or no AoA effects, as the mapping between letter and sound is regular and late-acquired words can benefit from the structure created by early-acquired words. [34]

Integrated theory

This theory argued that the AoA effect could be explained by both the representation theory and mapping theory such that the AoA effect is observed as a consequence of incremental learning, resulting from both the construction of representations and changing plasticity in the learning system. [35] [36] [37] [38] Early-acquired words use the rich resources available in the system to develop stronger connections with newer words, thus developing richer semantic representations, while late-acquired words have to tune to early-acquired words and thus have fewer connections to other words. In turn, the late-acquired word not only has a different mapping structure but also a processing cost. However, within opaque languages, the AoA can differ depending on the level of imageability (i.e. how imageable an item is). If the item has high imageability, the AoA effect is more likely to be small or non-existent, whereas if the item has low imageability, the AoA effect is more likely to be large. In transparent languages such as Spanish, if the item has low imageability, the AoA effect will not be evident, whereas if the item has high imageability, the AoA will be demonstrated. [39]

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Cognition</span> Act or process of knowing

Cognition is the "mental action or process of acquiring knowledge and understanding through thought, experience, and the senses". It encompasses all aspects of intellectual functions and processes such as: perception, attention, thought, imagination, intelligence, the formation of knowledge, memory and working memory, judgment and evaluation, reasoning and computation, problem-solving and decision-making, comprehension and production of language. Cognitive processes use existing knowledge and discover new knowledge.

Semantic memory refers to general world knowledge that humans have accumulated throughout their lives. This general knowledge is intertwined in experience and dependent on culture. New concepts are learned by applying knowledge learned from things in the past.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Picture superiority effect</span> Psychological phenomenon

The picture superiority effect refers to the phenomenon in which pictures and images are more likely to be remembered than are words. This effect has been demonstrated in numerous experiments using different methods. It is based on the notion that "human memory is extremely sensitive to the symbolic modality of presentation of event information". Explanations for the picture superiority effect are not concrete and are still being debated.

The spacing effect demonstrates that learning is more effective when study sessions are spaced out. This effect shows that more information is encoded into long-term memory by spaced study sessions, also known as spaced repetition or spaced presentation, than by massed presentation ("cramming").

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Testing effect</span> Memory effect in educational psychology

The testing effect suggests long-term memory is increased when part of the learning period is devoted to retrieving information from memory. It is different from the more general practice effect, defined in the APA Dictionary of Psychology as "any change or improvement that results from practice or repetition of task items or activities."

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Baddeley's model of working memory</span> Model of human memory

Baddeley's model of working memory is a model of human memory proposed by Alan Baddeley and Graham Hitch in 1974, in an attempt to present a more accurate model of primary memory. Working memory splits primary memory into multiple components, rather than considering it to be a single, unified construct.

The Levels of Processing model, created by Fergus I. M. Craik and Robert S. Lockhart in 1972, describes memory recall of stimuli as a function of the depth of mental processing. More analysis produce more elaborate and stronger memory than lower levels of processing. Depth of processing falls on a shallow to deep continuum. Shallow processing leads to a fragile memory trace that is susceptible to rapid decay. Conversely, deep processing results in a more durable memory trace. There are three levels of processing in this model. Structural processing, or visual, is when we remember only the physical quality of the word E.g how the word is spelled and how letters look. Phonemic processing includes remembering the word by the way it sounds. E.G the word tall rhymes with fall. Lastly, we have semantic processing in which we encode the meaning of the word with another word that is similar or has similar meaning. Once the word is perceived, the brain allows for a deeper processing.

The lexical decision task (LDT) is a procedure used in many psychology and psycholinguistics experiments. The basic procedure involves measuring how quickly people classify stimuli as words or nonwords.

Tip of the tongue is the phenomenon of failing to retrieve a word or term from memory, combined with partial recall and the feeling that retrieval is imminent. The phenomenon's name comes from the saying, "It's on the tip of my tongue." The tip of the tongue phenomenon reveals that lexical access occurs in stages.

In psychology and neuroscience, memory span is the longest list of items that a person can repeat back in correct order immediately after presentation on 50% of all trials. Items may include words, numbers, or letters. The task is known as digit span when numbers are used. Memory span is a common measure of working memory and short-term memory. It is also a component of cognitive ability tests such as the WAIS. Backward memory span is a more challenging variation which involves recalling items in reverse order.

Semantic satiation is a psychological phenomenon in which repetition causes a word or phrase to temporarily lose meaning for the listener, who then perceives the speech as repeated meaningless sounds. Extended inspection or analysis in place of repetition also produces the same effect.

The generation effect is a phenomenon whereby information is better remembered if it is generated from one's own mind rather than simply read. Researchers have struggled to account for why the generated information is better recalled than read information, but no single explanation has been sufficient to explain everything.

Redintegration refers to the restoration of the whole of something from a part of it. The everyday phenomenon is that a small part of a memory can remind a person of the entire memory, for example, “recalling an entire song when a few notes are played.” In cognitive psychology the word is used in reference to phenomena in the field of memory, where it is defined as "the use of long-term knowledge to facilitate recall." The process is hypothesised to be working as "pattern completion", where previous knowledge is used to facilitate the completion of the partially degraded memory trace.

Priming is the idea that exposure to one stimulus may influence a response to a subsequent stimulus, without conscious guidance or intention. The priming effect refers to the positive or negative effect of a rapidly presented stimulus on the processing of a second stimulus that appears shortly after. Generally speaking, the generation of priming effect depends on the existence of some positive or negative relationship between priming and target stimuli. For example, the word nurse might be recognized more quickly following the word doctor than following the word bread. Priming can be perceptual, associative, repetitive, positive, negative, affective, semantic, or conceptual. Priming effects involve word recognition, semantic processing, attention, unconscious processing, and many other issues, and are related to differences in various writing systems. Onset of priming effects can be almost instantaneous.

A word list is a list of a language's lexicon within some given text corpus, serving the purpose of vocabulary acquisition. A lexicon sorted by frequency "provides a rational basis for making sure that learners get the best return for their vocabulary learning effort", but is mainly intended for course writers, not directly for learners. Frequency lists are also made for lexicographical purposes, serving as a sort of checklist to ensure that common words are not left out. Some major pitfalls are the corpus content, the corpus register, and the definition of "word". While word counting is a thousand years old, with still gigantic analysis done by hand in the mid-20th century, natural language electronic processing of large corpora such as movie subtitles has accelerated the research field.

The mental lexicon is a component of the human language faculty that contains information regarding the composition of words, such as their meanings, pronunciations, and syntactic characteristics. The mental lexicon is used in linguistics and psycholinguistics to refer to individual speakers' lexical, or word, representations. However, there is some disagreement as to the utility of the mental lexicon as a scientific construct.

Retrieval-induced forgetting (RIF) is a memory phenomenon where remembering causes forgetting of other information in memory. The phenomenon was first demonstrated in 1994, although the concept of RIF has been previously discussed in the context of retrieval inhibition.

In linguistics, an expression is semantically ambiguous when it can have multiple meanings. The higher the number of synonyms a word has, the higher the degree of ambiguity. Like other kinds of ambiguity, semantic ambiguities are often clarified by context or by prosody. One's comprehension of a sentence in which a semantically ambiguous word is used is strongly influenced by the general structure of the sentence. The language itself is sometimes a contributing factor in the overall effect of semantic ambiguity, in the sense that the level of ambiguity in the context can change depending on whether or not a language boundary is crossed.

The word frequency effect is a psychological phenomenon where recognition times are faster for words seen more frequently than for words seen less frequently. Word frequency depends on individual awareness of the tested language. The phenomenon can be extended to different characters of the word in non-alphabetic languages such as Chinese.

Cyma Kathryn Van Petten is an American cognitive neuroscientist known for electrophysiological studies of language, memory, and cognition. She is Professor of Psychology at the State University of New York at Binghamton where she directs the Event-Related Potential Lab. Van Petten was recipient of the Early Career Award from the Society for Psychophysiological Research in 1994.

References

  1. ↑ "Age-of-Acquisition Effects in Word and Picture Identification".
  2. ↑ Elsherif, M. M.; Preece, E.; Catling, J. C. (2023-01-09). "Age-of-acquisition effects: A literature review". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 49 (5): 812–847. doi: 10.1037/xlm0001215 . ISSN   1939-1285. PMID   36622701. S2CID   255545091.
  3. ↑ Meschyan, Gayane; Hernandez, Arturo (2002-03-01). "Age of acquisition and word frequency: Determinants of object-naming speed and accuracy". Memory & Cognition. 30 (2): 262–269. doi: 10.3758/BF03195287 . ISSN   1532-5946. PMID   12035888.
  4. ↑ Morrison, Catriona M.; Ellis, Andrew W.; Quinlan, Philip T. (1992-11-01). "Age of acquisition, not word frequency, affects object naming, not object recognition". Memory & Cognition. 20 (6): 705–714. doi: 10.3758/BF03202720 . ISSN   1532-5946. PMID   1435273.
  5. ↑ Catling, J. C.; Elsherif, M. M. (2020-09-01). "The hunt for the age of acquisition effect: It's in the links!". Acta Psychologica. 209: 103138. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2020.103138. ISSN   0001-6918. PMID   32805435. S2CID   221165538.
  6. ↑ Brysbaert, Marc; Ellis, Andrew W. (2016-11-01). "Aphasia and age of acquisition: are early-learned words more resilient?". Aphasiology . 30 (11): 1240–1263. doi:10.1080/02687038.2015.1106439. ISSN   0268-7038. S2CID   4830641.
  7. ↑ Perret, Cyril; Bonin, Patrick (2019-12-01). "Which variables should be controlled for to investigate picture naming in adults? A Bayesian meta-analysis". Behavior Research Methods. 51 (6): 2533–2545. doi: 10.3758/s13428-018-1100-1 . ISSN   1554-3528. PMID   30066263.
  8. ↑ "CogLab: Age of Acquisition". coglab.cengage.com. Retrieved 2017-05-16.
  9. ↑ Elsherif, M.M.; Catling, J.C.; Frisson, S. (May 2020). "Two words as one: A multi-naming investigation of the age-of-acquisition effect in compound-word processing". Memory & Cognition. 48 (4): 511–525. doi:10.3758/s13421-019-00986-6. ISSN   0090-502X. PMC   7242258 . PMID   31755026.
  10. ↑ Chang, Ya-Ning; Lee, Chia-Ying (2020-12-01). "Age of acquisition effects on traditional Chinese character naming and lexical decision". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 27 (6): 1317–1324. doi:10.3758/s13423-020-01787-8. ISSN   1531-5320. PMC   7704508 . PMID   32789580.
  11. ↑ Łuniewska, Magdalena; Haman, Ewa; Armon-Lotem, Sharon; Etenkowski, Bartłomiej; Southwood, Frenette; Anđelković, Darinka; Blom, Elma; Boerma, Tessel; Chiat, Shula; de Abreu, Pascale Engel; Gagarina, Natalia (2016-09-01). "Ratings of age of acquisition of 299 words across 25 languages: Is there a cross-linguistic order of words?". Behavior Research Methods. 48 (3): 1154–1177. doi: 10.3758/s13428-015-0636-6 . ISSN   1554-3528. PMID   26276517. S2CID   39703538.
  12. ↑ Izura, Cristina; Ellis, Andrew W (2004-02-01). "Age of acquisition effects in translation judgement tasks". Journal of Memory and Language. 50 (2): 165–181. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2003.09.004. ISSN   0749-596X.
  13. ↑ Dirix, Nicolas; Duyck, Wouter (2017-12-01). "The first- and second-language age of acquisition effect in first- and second-language book reading". Journal of Memory and Language. 97: 103–120. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2017.07.012. ISSN   0749-596X. S2CID   140116885.
  14. ↑ "Age-of-acquisition ratings for 30 thousand English words". springer.com.
  15. ↑ Gilhooly, K. J. (1980). "Age-of-acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity, and ambiguity measures for 1,944 words". Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation. 12 (4): 395–427. doi: 10.3758/BF03201693 .
  16. ↑ Morrison, Catriona M. (August 1997). "Age of Acquisition Norms for a Large Set of Object Names and Their Relation to Adult Estimates and Other Variables". The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A. 50 (3): 528–559. doi:10.1080/027249897392017. S2CID   145696157.
  17. ↑ Juhasz, Barbara J.; Lai, Yun-Hsuan; Woodcock, Michelle L. (December 2015). "A database of 629 English compound words: ratings of familiarity, lexeme meaning dominance, semantic transparency, age of acquisition, imageability, and sensory experience". Behavior Research Methods. 47 (4): 1004–1019. doi: 10.3758/s13428-014-0523-6 . ISSN   1554-3528. PMID   25361864.
  18. ↑ Scott, Graham G.; Keitel, Anne; Becirspahic, Marc; Yao, Bo; Sereno, Sara C. (2019-06-01). "The Glasgow Norms: Ratings of 5,500 words on nine scales". Behavior Research Methods. 51 (3): 1258–1270. doi:10.3758/s13428-018-1099-3. ISSN   1554-3528. PMC   6538586 . PMID   30206797.
  19. ↑ "Age-of-Acquisition Effects in Word and Picture Identification".
  20. ↑ "Re-evaluating age-of-acquisition effects: are they simply cumulative-frequency effects?" (PDF).
  21. ↑ Ghyselinck, Mandy (January 2004). "Age of acquisition and the cumulative-frequency hypothesis: A review of the literature and a new multi-task investigation". Acta Psychologica. 115 (1): 43–67. doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2003.11.002. PMID   14734241.
  22. 1 2 Macmillan, Molly B.; Neath, Ian; Surprenant, Aimeé M. (2021-07-01). "Re-assessing age of acquisition effects in recognition, free recall, and serial recall". Memory & Cognition. 49 (5): 939–954. doi: 10.3758/s13421-021-01137-6 . ISSN   1532-5946. PMID   33558995. S2CID   231869671.
  23. 1 2 3 Lau, Mabel C; Goh, Winston D; Yap, Melvin J (2018-10-01). "An item-level analysis of lexical-semantic effects in free recall and recognition memory using the megastudy approach". Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 71 (10): 2207–2222. doi:10.1177/1747021817739834. ISSN   1747-0218. PMID   30226433. S2CID   52292000.
  24. 1 2 Catling, J. C.; Pymont, C.; Johnston, R. A.; Elsherif, M. M.; Clark, R.; Kendall, E. (2021-05-28). "Age of acquisition effects in recognition without identification tasks". Memory. 29 (5): 662–674. doi:10.1080/09658211.2021.1931695. ISSN   0965-8211. PMID   34028339. S2CID   235169015.
  25. 1 2 Elsherif, Mahmoud M.; Catling, Jonathan C. (2023-10-01). "Are two words recalled or recognised as one? How age-of-acquisition affects memory for compound words". Journal of Memory and Language. 132: 104449. doi: 10.1016/j.jml.2023.104449 . ISSN   0749-596X.
  26. ↑ Cortese, Michael J.; Schock, Jocelyn (2013-05-01). "Imageability and age of acquisition effects in disyllabic word recognition". Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 66 (5): 946–972. doi:10.1080/17470218.2012.722660. ISSN   1747-0218. PMID   23030642. S2CID   27216655.
  27. ↑ Brysbaert, Marc; Ghyselinck, Mandy (2006-05-01). "The effect of age of acquisition: Partly frequency related, partly frequency independent". Visual Cognition. 13 (7–8): 992–1011. doi:10.1080/13506280544000165. hdl: 1854/LU-599273 . ISSN   1350-6285. S2CID   4835404.
  28. ↑ Steyvers, Mark; Tenenbaum, Joshua B. (2005). "The Large-Scale Structure of Semantic Networks: Statistical Analyses and a Model of Semantic Growth". Cognitive Science. 29 (1): 41–78. arXiv: cond-mat/0110012 . doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2901_3. ISSN   1551-6709. PMID   21702767. S2CID   6000627.
  29. ↑ Brysbaert, Marc; Ellis, Andrew W. (2016-11-01). "Aphasia and age of acquisition: are early-learned words more resilient?". Aphasiology . 30 (11): 1240–1263. doi:10.1080/02687038.2015.1106439. ISSN   0268-7038. S2CID   4830641.
  30. ↑ Ellis, Andrew W.; Lambon Ralph, Matthew A. (2000). "Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: Insights from connectionist networks". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 26 (5): 1103–1123. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.26.5.1103. ISSN   1939-1285. PMID   11009247.
  31. ↑ Monaghan, Padraic; Ellis, Andrew W. (2010-11-01). "Modeling reading development: Cumulative, incremental learning in a computational model of word naming". Journal of Memory and Language. 63 (4): 506–525. doi:10.1016/j.jml.2010.08.003. ISSN   0749-596X.
  32. ↑ Lambon Ralph, Matthew A.; Ehsan, Sheeba (2006-05-01). "Age of acquisition effects depend on the mapping between representations and the frequency of occurrence: Empirical and computational evidence". Visual Cognition. 13 (7–8): 928–948. doi:10.1080/13506280544000110. hdl: 1854/LU-599273 . ISSN   1350-6285. S2CID   53633875.
  33. ↑ Zevin, Jason D.; Seidenberg, Mark S. (2004-01-01). "Age-of-acquisition effects in reading aloud: Tests of cumulative frequency and frequency trajectory". Memory & Cognition. 32 (1): 31–38. doi: 10.3758/BF03195818 . ISSN   1532-5946. PMID   15078042.
  34. ↑ Elsherif, M. M.; Preece, E.; Catling, J. C. (2023-01-09). "Age-of-acquisition effects: A literature review". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 49 (5): 812–847. doi: 10.1037/xlm0001215 . ISSN   1939-1285. PMID   36622701. S2CID   255545091.
  35. ↑ Brysbaert, Marc; Ellis, Andrew W. (2016-11-01). "Aphasia and age of acquisition: are early-learned words more resilient?". Aphasiology . 30 (11): 1240–1263. doi:10.1080/02687038.2015.1106439. ISSN   0268-7038. S2CID   4830641.
  36. ↑ Dirix, Nicolas; Duyck, Wouter (2017-12-01). "An eye movement corpus study of the age-of-acquisition effect". Psychonomic Bulletin & Review. 24 (6): 1915–1921. doi: 10.3758/s13423-017-1233-8 . ISSN   1531-5320. PMID   28116701. S2CID   22669248.
  37. ↑ Menenti, Laura; Burani, Cristina (2007-05-01). "What causes the effect of age of acquisition in lexical processing?". Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 60 (5): 652–660. doi:10.1080/17470210601100126. hdl: 11858/00-001M-0000-0012-2A1C-1 . ISSN   1747-0218. PMID   17455073. S2CID   13058539.
  38. ↑ Elsherif, M.M.; Catling, J.C. (2021-12-09). "Age of acquisition effects on the decomposition of compound words". Journal of Cognitive Psychology. 34 (3): 325–338. doi:10.1080/20445911.2021.2013246. ISSN   2044-5911. S2CID   245017698.
  39. ↑ Elsherif, M. M.; Preece, E.; Catling, J. C. (2023-01-09). "Age-of-acquisition effects: A literature review". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 49 (5): 812–847. doi: 10.1037/xlm0001215 . ISSN   1939-1285. PMID   36622701. S2CID   255545091.
This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.