Lexical access in mild cognitive impairment
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
We examined the use of sentence context in lexical processing in aging and mild cognitive impairment (MCI). Younger and older adults and participants with MCI completed a lexical decision task in which target words were primed by sentences biasing a related or unrelated word (e.g., prime: “The baby put the spoon in his ______”, biased word: “mouth”, related target: “KISS”, unrelated target: “LEASH”). Biased items were of high or low frequency. All participants responded more quickly when the biased word was of high than low frequency, regardless of whether the target and biased word were related. Frequency effects were stronger in related than unrelated stimuli, and MCI participants – but not controls – responded more slowly when the target was related to a low-frequency word than when it was unrelated. We hypothesize that this effect results from slowed lexical activation in MCI: low frequency expected words are not completely activated when the target word is presented, leading to increased competition between the expected and target items, and resultant slowing in lexical decision on the target. These results indicate that MCI participants can use contextual information to make predictions about upcoming lexical items, and that information about lexical associations remains available in MCI.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it