Malay Lexicon Project 3: The impact of orthographic–semantic consistency on lexical decision latencies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theories of word processing propose that readers are sensitive to statistical co-occurrences between spelling and meaning. Orthographic–semantic consistency (OSC) measures provide a continuous estimate of the statistical regularities between spelling and meaning. Here we examined Malay, an Austronesian language that is agglutinative. In Malay, stems are often repeated in other words that share a related meaning (e.g., sunyi / quiet; ke-sunyi-an / silence; makan / eat; makan - an / foods ). The first goal was to expand an existing large Malay database by computing OSC estimates for 2,287 monomorphemic words. The second goal was to explore the impact of root family size and OSC on lexical decision latencies for monomorphemic words. Decision latencies were collected for 1,280 Malay words of various morphological structures. Of these, data from 1,000 monomorphemic words were analysed in a series of generalised additive mixed models (GAMMs). Root family size and OSC were significant predictors of decision latencies, particularly for lower frequency words. We found a facilitative effect of root family size and OSC. Furthermore, we observed an interaction between root family size and OSC in that an effect of OSC was only apparent in words with larger root families. This interaction has not yet been explored in English but has the potential to be a new benchmark effect to test distributional models of word processing.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".