The Glasgow Norms: Ratings of 5,500 words on nine scales.
The Glasgow Norms: Ratings of 5,500 words on nine scales.
复制标题
DOI：
10.3758/s13428-018-1099-3
复制
发表时间：
2019-06
影响因子：
5.4
通讯作者：
Sereno SC
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Scott GG;Keitel A;Becirspahic M;Yao B;Sereno SC
格拉斯哥标准是对5553个英语单词在9个心理语言学维度上的一套规范评级：唤醒、效价、支配、具体、可想象、熟悉、习得年龄、语义大小和性别关联。格拉斯哥规范在几个方面是独一无二的。首先，语料库本身相对较大，同时提供了跨越大量词汇维度的规范。其次，对于任何给定的单词子集，相同的参与者提供了所有九个维度的评分（平均33个参与者/单词）。第三，引入语义大小和性别关联两个新维度。最后，语料库包含一组379个歧义词，这些词要么单独呈现（例如，toast），要么与选择替代意义的信息一起呈现（例如，toast（面包），toast（演讲））。格拉斯哥规范各维度之间的关系最初是通过评估其相关性来研究的。此外，主成分分析揭示了四个主要因素，占82%的方差（可视化，情感，显著性和暴露）。格拉斯哥规范的有效性是通过将我们的评分与18套不同的当前心理语言学规范进行比较而建立起来的。尺寸的维度用大型研究数据进行了测试，证实了过去明确检查该变量的研究结果。歧义词的不同意义（即消歧义形式），当在给定维度上不一致时，似乎会导致适当的不同评级。对歧义词和其替代意义的非正式比较显示出不同的模式，这可能取决于几个因素（意义的数量、它们的相对优势和评分尺度本身）。总的来说，格拉斯哥规范提供了宝贵的资源，特别是对于研究单词识别在语言理解中的作用的研究人员。本文的在线版本（10.3758/s13428-018-1099-3）包含补充内容，仅供授权用户使用。
The Glasgow Norms are a set of normative ratings for 5,553 English words on nine psycholinguistic dimensions: arousal, valence, dominance, concreteness, imageability, familiarity, age of acquisition, semantic size, and gender association. The Glasgow Norms are unique in several respects. First, the corpus itself is relatively large, while simultaneously providing norms across a substantial number of lexical dimensions. Second, for any given subset of words, the same participants provided ratings across all nine dimensions (33 participants/word, on average). Third, two novel dimensions—semantic size and gender association—are included. Finally, the corpus contains a set of 379 ambiguous words that are presented either alone (e.g., toast) or with information that selects an alternative sense (e.g., toast (bread), toast (speech)). The relationships between the dimensions of the Glasgow Norms were initially investigated by assessing their correlations. In addition, a principal component analysis revealed four main factors, accounting for 82% of the variance (Visualization, Emotion, Salience, and Exposure). The validity of the Glasgow Norms was established via comparisons of our ratings to 18 different sets of current psycholinguistic norms. The dimension of size was tested with megastudy data, confirming findings from past studies that have explicitly examined this variable. Alternative senses of ambiguous words (i.e., disambiguated forms), when discordant on a given dimension, seemingly led to appropriately distinct ratings. Informal comparisons between the ratings of ambiguous words and of their alternative senses showed different patterns that likely depended on several factors (the number of senses, their relative strengths, and the rating scales themselves). Overall, the Glasgow Norms provide a valuable resource—in particular, for researchers investigating the role of word recognition in language comprehension. The online version of this article (10.3758/s13428-018-1099-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
登录
查看更多内容
DOI：
10.3758/bf03201694
发表时间：
1980-01-01
期刊：
BEHAVIOR RESEARCH METHODS & INSTRUMENTATION
影响因子：
--
作者：
GILHOOLY, KJ;LOGIE, RH
通讯作者：
LOGIE, RH
影响因子：
2.4
作者：
Balota, DA;Pilotti, M;Cortese, MJ
通讯作者：
Cortese, MJ
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Cortese, Michael J.;Khanna, Maya M.
通讯作者：
Khanna, Maya M.
影响因子：
5.4
作者：
Cortese, Michael J.;Khanna, Maya M.
通讯作者：
Khanna, Maya M.
DOI：
10.1080/17470218.2016.1172097
发表时间：
2017-01-01
影响因子：
1.7
作者：
Brysbaert, Marc
通讯作者：
Brysbaert, Marc