4.6 Article

Validated measures of semantic knowledge and semantic control: normative data from young and older adults for more than 300 semantic judgements

期刊

ROYAL SOCIETY OPEN SCIENCE
卷 9, 期 2, 页码 -

出版社

ROYAL SOC
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.211056

关键词

semantic cognition; cognitive ageing; executive function; knowledge

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Recent studies show that knowledge representations and control processes are crucial for semantic cognition. Notably, older individuals have more detailed semantic knowledge but less effective semantic control processes compared to younger individuals. Additionally, word frequency and inter-item competition have expected effects on performance.
Recent studies suggest that knowledge representations and control processes are the two key components underpinning semantic cognition, and are also crucial indicators of the shifting cognitive architecture of semantics in later life. Although there are many standardized assessments that provide measures of the quantity of semantic knowledge participants possess, normative data for tasks that probe semantic control processes are not yet available. Here, we present normative data from more than 200 young and older participants on a large set of stimuli in two semantic tasks, which probe controlled semantic processing (feature-matching task) and semantic knowledge (synonym judgement task). We verify the validity of our norms by replicating established age- and psycholinguistic-property-related effects on semantic cognition. Specifically, we find that older people have more detailed semantic knowledge than young people but have less effective semantic control processes. We also obtain expected effects of word frequency and inter-item competition on performance. Parametrically varied difficulty levels are defined for half of the stimuli based on participants' behavioural performance, allowing future studies to produce customized sets of experimental stimuli based on our norms. We provide all stimuli, data and code used for analysis, in the hope that they are useful to other researchers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据