Jonathan C. Catling

The Varying Effects of Age of Acquisition

There are a number of theories that suggest that age of acquisition (AoA) effects are not uniform across different tasks. Catling and Johnston (2006a) found greater AoA effects within an object-naming task than in a semantic classification task. They explained these findings by suggesting that AoA effects might accumulate according to how many levels of representation a task necessitates access to. Brysbaert and Ghyselinck (2006) explain the difference in AoA effects by proposing two distinct types of AoA (frequency dependent and frequency independent), the first accounted for by a connectionist-type mechanism and the latter situated at the interface between semantics and word production. Moreover, Moore, Smith-Spark, and Valentine (2004) and Holmes and Ellis (2006) have suggested that there are two loci of AoA effects: at the phonological level and somewhere within the perceptual level of representation. Again, this could account for the varying degrees of AoA effects. This study sets about testing these ideas by assessing the effect size of AoA across a series of different tasks that necessitate access to various levels of representation. Experiments 1–4 demonstrate significant effects of AoA in a novel picture–picture verification task, an object classification task, a picture verification task, and an object-naming task. Experiment 5 showed no effects of initial phoneme on the naming of the critical objects used within Experiments 1–4. The implication of the varying AoA effect sizes found within Experiments 1–4 in relation to explanations of AoA are discussed.

Age of acquisition effects on word generation

An early demonstration of the impact of when words were learned was found by Loftus and Suppes (1972). They showed that childrens vocabulary had a significant effect on adult word generation times. However their stimuli were not explicitly rated for age of acquisition (AoA). Two experiments in the current study used an adaptation of their methodology but made use of explicit AoA ratings and implemented a matched list design. Stimuli consisted of a category followed by an initial letter of a category member, e.g., Vegetable: C. In the first experiment two groups of early and late acquired words were selected. These groups were balanced on all of the relevant independent variables. Results showed that the earlier acquired target words were produced significantly faster than the later acquired target words. In the second experiment two groups of high and low frequency words were selected. These groups were balanced for AoA and on other relevant variables. There was no significant effect of frequency on word generation tasks. A third experiment employed a delayed word naming task, to eliminate any confounding effects of the initial phoneme onset of the stimuli used.

The effects of age of acquisition on an object classification task

The age at which an item is acquired (age of acquisition; AoA) affects naming latencies for words, objects, and faces. Ellis and Lambon Ralph (2000) proposed an account of AoA that predicts its effect in any task requiring access to stored information. AoA effects have been found in non-naming tasks for faces (e.g., Lewis, 1999) and words (e.g., Brysbaert, van Wijnendaele, & de Deyne, 2000) but not for pictures (e.g., Morrison, Ellis, & Quinlan, 1992). The current study explored the effect of AoA on a manmade/natural picture classification task, but extended previous work by implementing a matched groups design. Early acquired objects were classified significantly more quickly than later acquired objects. Experiment 2 collected naming latencies for the same picture stimuli to allow a comparison of the magnitude of the AoA effect for semantic classification and naming. The AoA effect was significantly greater for the naming task. The implications of these findings in relation to accounts of AoA and its locus of effect are discussed.

Age of acquisition, not word frequency affects object recognition: Evidence from the effects of visual degradation

Four experiments examined how age of acquisition (AoA) and word frequency (WF) interact with manipulations of image quality in a picture-naming task. Experiments 1 and 2 examined the effect of overlaying the to-be-named picture with irrelevant contours. The magnitude of the AoA effect increased when the contours were added (Experiment 1), but the effect of WF remained constant (Experiment 2). Experiments 3 and 4 examined the effects of reducing the contrast of the contours defining the to-be-named picture. Both the effects of AoA (Experiment 3) and WF (Experiment 4) remained constant in the face of contrast reduction. These results provide an empirical dissociation of the effects of AoA and WF. The results are consistent with the idea that both AoA and the addition of irrelevant contours affect the efficiency of object recognition, but WF affects later processes involved in retrieval of object names. The theoretical implications of these findings in relation to accounts of AoA and frequency and their functional localisation in the lexical system are discussed.

Age of acquisition, word frequency, and picture–word interference

In two experiments participants named pictures superimposed with unrelated words. The age of acquisition (AoA) of the picture names was manipulated. Additionally, the word frequency (WF, Experiment 1) or AoA (Experiment 2) of the interfering distractor words was manipulated. Early-acquired pictures were named faster than their late-acquired counterparts. Both WF and AoA modulated the degree of interference from the irrelevant word; low-frequency and late-acquired words produced most interference. In neither case did the WF or AoA of the distractor word interact with the AoA of the picture. The results show that in the context of word processing both WF and AoA have similar effects.

Age of acquisition effects on an object-name verification task

Naming latencies for words, objects and faces have been shown to be affected by the age at which an item is acquired (AoA). Originally, this effect was explained in terms of differential access to name representations. However, a number of recent studies have found AoA effects in tasks which do not require access to names (e.g. Brysbaert, Van Wijnendaele, & De Deynes, 2000; Lewis, 1999; Moore, Smith Spark, & Valentine, 2004; Moore & Valentine, 1999). Ellis and Lambon Ralph (2000) propose an alternative account of AoA, predicting that the effect should arise in any task where previously stored information is retrieved. The current study explored the effect of AoA on an object-name verification task. Experiments 1 and 2 demonstrated that early acquired objects were verified significantly faster than later acquired objects. A third experiment collected naming latencies for the same picture stimuli in order to allow a comparison of the magnitude of the AoA effect for object verification and naming. The implications of these findings for accounts of AoA and its locus of effect are discussed.

Quality is in the eye of the beholder? An evaluation of impact factors and perception of journal prestige in the UK

A number of proxy measures have been used as indicators of journal quality. The most recent and commonly employed are journal impact factors. These measures are somewhat controversial, although they are frequently referred to in establishing the impact of published journal articles. Within psychology, little is known about the relationship between the ‘objective’ impact factors of journals and the ‘subjective’ ratings of prestige and perceived publishing difficulty amongst academics. In order to address this, a cross-sectional web-based survey was conducted in the UK to investigate research activity and academics’ views of journals within three fields of psychology; cognitive, health and social. Impact factors for each journal were correlated with individual academic’s perceptions of prestige and publishing difficulty for each journal. A number of variables pertaining to the individual academic and their place of work were assessed as predictors of these correlation values, including age, gender, institution type, and a measure of departmental research activity. The implications of these findings are discussed in relation to perceptions of journal prestige and publishing difficulty, higher education in general and the assessment of research activity within academic institutions.

The Effect of Age of Acquisition on Older Individuals with and without Cognitive Impairments

The present study compared the effects of age of acquisition (AoA) on object naming across groups of older individuals with cognitive impairments, healthy older controls, and young healthy controls. All participants named a set of 80 pictures, within which both AoA and frequency were manipulated orthogonally. Early-acquired objects were named faster than late-acquired objects across all groups. Response time also declined with age and with cognitive impairment between the groups. The effect of AoA differed across groups, with AoA effects being largest for the older group with cognitive impairments and smallest for the young control group. The present study adds strength to the suggestion that AoA of picture names is one of the factors that influence survival or loss of memories in dementia and cognitive decline, and this could therefore be used as a potential screening test for cognitive impairment disorders in the future.

Effects of age of acquisition and priming on picture naming

Four experiments examined the interaction of age of acquisition (AoA) and priming on picture naming. Experiment 1 found that initial-letter priming and AoA significantly affected picture-naming latencies, but there was no interaction between them. Experiment 2 found that initial-phoneme priming and AoA significantly affected picture-naming latencies, but again there was no interaction. Experiment 3 repeated Barry, Hirsh, Johnston, and Williamss (2001) priming study using a very short interval between prime and target. Experiment 3 replicated previous findings of a significant interaction between priming and AoA. Experiment 4 repeated this investigation with a procedure that did not require participants to articulate the prime. Once again, there were significant effects of priming, AoA, and the interaction between them. The implications of these findings in relation to accounts of AoA and its locus of effect are discussed.