GARCIA adolfo Martin
congresos y reuniones científicas
Psycholinguistic Variables Involved in Concept Recall Following the Presentation of Sequential Features
VIVAS, LETICIA; GARCÍA, ADOLFO M.; VIVAS, JORGE; RICCI, LILIANA; MCINTYRE, MAURICIO
British Columbia, Vancouver
Conferencia; 41 LACUS Conference; 2014
University of British Columbia
this issue through naming-to-description tasks (e.g., Marques 2005). In this paradigm, a set of features describing a concept is presented and participants must discover the latter?s name. Typically, the features are selected by the experimenter and presented simultaneously. The present study diverges from this standard procedure in two ways: first, the attributes and their order of presentation were empirically derived from dialectspecific (rioplatense Spanish) semantic-feature-production norms (Vivas et al. 2011); second, they were presented sequentially in accordance with the weight revealed by such norms. The goal was to assess the recall process following the same path used when describing a concept through features. Our sample comprised 120 adults (18-40 years old). For each of the 40 trials, 12 features relevant to a concept were extracted from the norms. Subjects were asked to name the concepts as fast as possible. Stimuli were presented using RecSem software (García et al. 2014), which quantifies correct responses and false alarms. Effects of the concepts? characteristics ?lexical frequency, age of acquisition (AoA), and familiarity? and their features ?type, distinctiveness, and relevance? were analyzed in terms of two response variables: (a) number of participants who recalled the concept name, and (b) mode of the correct responses (i.e., the ranking of the feature triggering the correct response in most subjects). As an example of (a), low-AoA concept analysis showed that BED and BANANA were recalled by 120 and 119 participants, respectively; while high-AoA concept analysis showed that PALM TREE and CHERRY were recalled by 110 and 87 subjects, respectively. To illustrate (b), the mode for BED was 3; relevant features included USED TO SLEEP, REST, and MADE OF WOOD. To analyze (a), a classical linear model was adjusted. As the random component was not normally distributed (Shapiro Wilk?s p-value = .0003) and data presented a negative asymmetry, a Tweedie model was adjusted. Both AoA and the presence of distinctive features had an effect on the number of participants who produced the concept?s name (R2 = .61; p < .001). In terms of (b), the data was not normally distributed (W = .93; p < .05). Thus, a classic lineal model was adjusted with the logarithm of correct response mode as a dependent variable (Shapiro-Wilk?s W value = .99; p = .98). After stepwise variable selection, only familiarity, AoA, and the presence of taxonomic features were included in the model (R2 = .41; p < .001). Only the latter two were significant (p < .05). In conclusion, AoA and the presence of distinctive and taxonomic features were significant variables. This suggests that concepts acquired earlier in life are easier to recall since they are more readily available. Also, while presentation of an attribute referring to the concept?s taxonomic category would narrow the search process, the presence of distinctive features would allow to discriminate concepts within a category and fine-tune the search.