ArticleJournal of psycholinguistic research2019
Are French Fries a Vegetable? Lexical Typicality Judgement Differences in Deaf and Hearing Learners.
Article in Journal of psycholinguistic research, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) learners are known to have vocabulary knowledge and language outcomes more heterogeneous than their hearing peers, with a greater incidence of difficulties presumably related (both as cause and effect) to documented challenges in academic domains. In particular, there is increasing evidence that differences may exist in the ways that semantic networks are structured and accessed in DHH and hearing learners. Individuals' judgments of word typicality offers a window into their semantic networks, revealing internal relationships in the mental lexicon. In the present study, 90 DHH and hearing college-aged learners provided typicality ratings at two points in time for 120 words common words considered to be central, borderline, or non-members of six categories. DHH and hearing participants differed in terms of their word knowledge, rating consistency, and rating magnitudes. Relative to hearing peers, DHH participants reported not knowing more of the words, but rated all words as being more typical than did hearing participants and rated the typicality of items more consistently over time. Implications of these findings for understanding mental lexicon structure for DHH and hearing learners, interpreting previous research, and constructing stimuli for future research are discussed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31399872What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.