Neighbourhood Density, Word Frequency, and Spelling-Sound Regularity Effects in Naming: Similarities and Differences Between Skilled Readers and the Dual Route Cascaded Computational Model.
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
An experiment with skilled readers and a series of simulations with the Dual Route Cascaded model (Coltheart, Rastle, Perry, Langdon, & Ziegler, 2001) investigated the joint effects of stimulus quality and Neighbourhood Density (N) in nonword naming. Neighbourhood Density and stimulus quality yielded additive effects on RT for skilled readers whereas the model produced an interaction between these factors. A further set of simulations show that DRC also produces an interaction between stimulus quality and (1) word frequency, (2) spelling-sound regularity, and, (3) nonword letter length. None of these three factors interact with stimulus quality in performance by skilled readers. It is suggested that DRC's assumption of cascaded processing throughout represents a central problem. A proposal as to how the model can be modified to accommodate these and other problematic data is discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it