Lexical Neighborhood Density Effects on Spoken Word Recognition and Production in Healthy Aging
Bibliographic record
Abstract
We examined the effects of lexical competition and word frequency on spoken word recognition and production in healthy aging. Older (n = 16) and younger adults (n = 21) heard and repeated meaningful English sentences presented in the presence of multitalker babble at two signal-to-noise ratios, +10 and -3 dB. Each sentence contained three keywords of high or low word frequency and phonological neighborhood density (ND). Both participant groups responded less accurately to high- than low-ND stimuli; response latencies (from stimulus offset to response onset) were longer for high- than low-ND sentences, whereas response durations-time from response onset to response offset-were longer for low- than high-ND stimuli. ND effects were strongest for older adults in the most difficult conditions, and ND effects in accuracy were related to inhibitory function. The results suggest that the sentence repetition task described here taps the effects of lexical competition in both perception and production and that these effects are similar across the life span, but that accuracy in the lexical discrimination process is affected by declining inhibitory function in older adults.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
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 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".