TY - JOUR
T1 - The Rank Hypothesis and Lexical Decision
T2 - A Reply to Adelman and Brown (2008)
AU - Murray, Wayne S.
AU - Forster, Kenneth I.
PY - 2008/1
Y1 - 2008/1
N2 - J. S. Adelman and G. D. A. Brown (2008) provided an extensive analysis of the form of word frequency and contextual diversity effects on lexical decision time. In this reply, the current authors suggest that their analysis provides a valuable tool for the evaluation of models of lexical access and that the results they report are broadly supportive of the rank hypothesis suggested by W. S. Murray and K. I. Forster (2004)-more supportive, in fact, than the originally reported data. However, Adelman and Brown's conclusion that the results of these analyses can be taken as evidence against rank (and thereby serial models of lexical access) and for instance models is rejected. It is shown that at least one instance model makes the wrong predictions and that Adelman and Brown's conclusions rest on the assumption that lexical decision time presents a pure measure of the time involved in lexical access. Results from eye tracking are reported, which also support a rank account, as do results from analyses that show that a log frequency account is clearly inadequate. Finally, it is demonstrated that, unlike other models, the rank account continues to make accurate predictions regarding the form of both reaction time and error rate effects.
AB - J. S. Adelman and G. D. A. Brown (2008) provided an extensive analysis of the form of word frequency and contextual diversity effects on lexical decision time. In this reply, the current authors suggest that their analysis provides a valuable tool for the evaluation of models of lexical access and that the results they report are broadly supportive of the rank hypothesis suggested by W. S. Murray and K. I. Forster (2004)-more supportive, in fact, than the originally reported data. However, Adelman and Brown's conclusion that the results of these analyses can be taken as evidence against rank (and thereby serial models of lexical access) and for instance models is rejected. It is shown that at least one instance model makes the wrong predictions and that Adelman and Brown's conclusions rest on the assumption that lexical decision time presents a pure measure of the time involved in lexical access. Results from eye tracking are reported, which also support a rank account, as do results from analyses that show that a log frequency account is clearly inadequate. Finally, it is demonstrated that, unlike other models, the rank account continues to make accurate predictions regarding the form of both reaction time and error rate effects.
KW - eye movements
KW - frequency
KW - mathematical modeling
KW - rank
KW - word recognition
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=39049106572&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=39049106572&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1037/0033-295X.115.1.240
DO - 10.1037/0033-295X.115.1.240
M3 - Article
C2 - 18211198
AN - SCOPUS:39049106572
SN - 0033-295X
VL - 115
SP - 240
EP - 251
JO - Psychological Review
JF - Psychological Review
IS - 1
ER -