Psycholinguistics Analysis: Lexical Decision Experiments Report

This report presents an analysis of two lexical decision experiments (LD1 and LD2) conducted to investigate word recognition and lexical access. The experiments involved priming paradigms and measured reaction times to classify stimuli as words or nonwords. The first experiment (LD1) tested the effect of related, unrelated, and nonword stimuli, while the second (LD2) examined high, low, and nonword stimuli. The analysis revealed faster reaction times for related and high-frequency words, supporting the hypotheses that related primes and familiar words facilitate quicker responses. The report discusses the methodology, participant details, hypotheses, results, and implications of the findings, referencing relevant literature on lexical decision tasks and priming effects. The results indicate that familiarity and relatedness significantly influence the speed and accuracy of word recognition, highlighting the organization of words in the human mental lexicon.

1
RUNNINGHEAD: Analysis Report
ANALYSIS REPORT OF LEXICO DECISION EXPERIMENT
INTRODUCTION
For a number of years lexical decision task (LDT) has been used in studies delving into semantic
memory and lexical access in general. Broadly, LDT is a procedure carried out in
psycholinguistic experiments with the aim of trying to measure how quick people are able to
classify stimuli as words or nonwords. (Wikipedia, 2018).
Generally, the analysis is based on the number of times of the reaction and errors for various
conditions in which the words differ. The data collected from the experiments is used in carrying
out analysis and interpretation of results to determine the truth of stated hypotheses.
In our analysis there were two experiments carried out:
i. LD1_Expt
ii. LD2_Expt
The aim was to test how we access and recognize words so that there is an understanding of how
words are organized and retrieved from the human mental lexicon.
Basically after carrying out the experiments, the average response results were:
LD1_Expt
Non-word - 4.12378675
Related -1.382379516
Unrelated -2.161329487
LD2_Expt
High-1.131666712
Low-3.844965589
Non-word-5.292302466
METHODS
Participants:
There was one participant in this experiment: “Student’s name.”

2
Analysis Report
Native Languages: “Language”
Materials
In the materials used in carrying out the experiment included:
i. Experiment 1: Experiment uses 3 Stimuli relationship (related, unrelated and nonword)
The conditions were (Related , Unrelated, and Nonword).There were 20 pairs each, of unrelated
and related and 40 pairs of nonwords conditions. The 1st experiment had actual English words as
prime words but with different targets.
ii. Experiment 2: The experiment uses 3 Stimuli type (High, low and nonword)
The conditions were (High, Low and Nonword) with 20 pairs each, of high and low and 40 pairs
of nonword conditions. The software used to record outcome of the experiment results was
psychopy program while that used for analysis was Microsoft 2017 Excel.
PROCEDURE
LD1_Expt
This was a priming experiment conducted in a psychopy environment. There were 80 pairs of
both words and nonwords, in each trial there was a prime word followed by a target word. After
opening the psychopy software, the researchers who were seated in front of a computer, were
flushed with words and they were to respond if the second word of a pair was an English word or
not. The instructions were to press “F” If it was an English word and “J” if otherwise.
LD2_Expt
This was a simpler lexical decision experiment conducted in a psychopy environment, carried
out using 80 words and nonwords, one after another. Researchers were seated in front of a
computer, with words flushed one after the other, they were tasked to respond if the word were
English or not. Then press “F” if it was a real English word or not and “J” if otherwise. The
results were then recorded as text files by psychopy, which were then used in analysis.

3
Analysis Report
HYPOTHESES
As in every research, there is a hypothesis to be tested. Similarly the hypotheses underlying our
experiments were:
Hypothesis 1 (LD1_Expt): We seek to prove that, the chance for one responding quickly to a
target word given a related prime word is high, i.e. one easily relates to a word if the previous
word was similar. For instance if one is given an English word as a prime, chance are if the
second word is also English they will easily recognize. Whereas, if given a non-English word as
a prime, chances of making an error in identifying the second as English are high. Therefore,
while the nonword is relatively slower, the related condition has the fastest reaction time since
the conceptualization of an English word has been activated therefore easily identifying an
English word.
Hypothesis 2 (LD2_Expt): The underlying hypothesis for carrying out this experiment was to
show that when the condition was high for stimuli type, the response rate is fast, while the
nonword is relatively slow. This is because there is no relation between the current word and the
previous, therefore the recognition time for each word in determining whether it is English or not
relatively fast than when it is low or nonword
RESULTS
LD1_Expt mean average 2.621103518
Graph for reaction time against relationship stimuli

4
Analysis Report
LD2_Expt mean average: 3.687048654
Graph for reaction time against relationship stimuli
Figure 1Graph for reaction time against stimuli type.
DISCUSSION
In the first experiment, the responses for related condition on prime and target words are
relatively fast, followed by that of unrelated, whereas the nonword responses are the slowest.
Similarly, in the second experiment, the response for the high condition is relatively fast
compared to that of low and nonword having the lowest responses.
This is due to the difference in effect on the decision node by different stimuli, triggering
different response rate, with familiarity being a fast response all the way to unfamiliarity that
triggers a slower response. This is true for both priming and lexico decision experiments. Marek
(2009)
Therefore the original hypothesis for LD1_Expt hold according to the experiments that we
carried out. For instance, in the 1st experiment. Related condition has the fastest average response
time (1.382379516), this proves that one quickly responds to a related stimuli, i.e. a target word
given a related prime, thus priming, which occurs when a response stimuli is influenced by a
receding stimuli. Yolanda (2016). Hence the priming paradigm. Priming paradigm facilitate
probing of the organization of words in the mind.

5
Analysis Report
According to O’Grady. On lexico decisions, many of the experiments carried out indicate that
participants in LDT’s tend to make faster recognition on frequently used words compared to the
less used. O’Grady & Archibald (2015).
This is true for LD2_Expt, where the response on high (familiar) English words is fast
(1.131666712) compared to the less used words (low-3.844965589) and the nonword
(5.292302466). Therefore our original hypothesis holds. This, according to Hauk et al is because
we tend to think we understand a familiar word “immediately”. Hauk et al (2012).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Narky, B. (2018, February 19). Lexical Decision Task. Retrieved from:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lexical_decision_task
psytoolkit. (2017, September 22). Lexical Decision Task. Retrieved from:
www.psytoolkit.org/experiment-library/ldt.html
Marek, P. (2009, June 12). Lexical Decision. Retrieved from:
www.opl.apa.org/Experiments/AboutLexicalDecision.aspx
Yolanda, W. (2016, November 17). Lexical Decision Tasks. Retrieved from:
www.study.com/academy/lesson/lexical-decision-tasks-definition-example.html
O’Grady, W., & Archibald, J. (2015). Contemporary linguistic analysis: An Introduction. (8th
Canadian Ed) Pearson Canada.
Mary, J., Stephen, D., David, B., & Beth, G. (2012, Dec 5). Lexical Familiarity and Processing
efficiency: Individual differences in Naming, Lexical Decision, and Semantic Categorization.
Retrieved from: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3514868/
Hauk, O., Holden, A., Chen, Y., & Coutcout, C (2012, April 2). The Time Course for Single
Word Reading: Evidence from Fast Behavioral and brain responses. Retrieved from:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3382728/