MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4409147508 · doi:10.3758/s13428-025-02628-z

SingleMALD: Investigating practice effects in auditory lexical decision

2025· article· en· W4409147508 on OpenAlexafffund
Filip Nenadić, Katarina Bujandrić, Matthew C. Kelley, Benjamin V. Tucker

Bibliographic record

VenueBehavior Research Methods · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicReading and Literacy Development
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
KeywordsLexical decision taskStimulus (psychology)PsychologyComputer scienceLexical accessTask (project management)Cognitive psychologyAudiologyCognitionMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We present SingleMALD, a large-scale auditory lexical decision study in English with a fully crossed design. SingleMALD is freely available and includes over 2 million trials in which 40 native speakers of English responded to over 26,000 different words and over 9000 different pseudowords, each in 67 balanced sessions. SingleMALD features a large number of responses per stimulus, but a smaller number of participants, thus complementing the Massive Auditory Lexical Decision (MALD) dataset which features many listeners but fewer responses per stimulus. In the present report, we also use SingleMALD data to explore how extensive testing affects performance in the auditory lexical decision task. SingleMALD participants show signs of favoring speed over accuracy as the sessions unfold. Additionally, we find that the relationship between participant performance and two lexical predictors - word frequency and phonological neighborhood density - changes as sessions unfold, especially for certain lexical predictor values. We note that none of the changes are drastic, indicating that data collected from participants that have been extensively tested is usable, although we recommend accounting for participant experience with the task when performing statistical analyses of the data.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.018
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.018

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.018
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.229
GPT teacher head0.651
Teacher spread0.421 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBehavior Research MethodsSame topicReading and Literacy DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207