Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34609218›Full record

ArticleQuarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006)2022

Not just form, not just meaning: Words with consistent form-meaning mappings are learned earlier.

Giovanni Cassani, Niklas Limacher

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Quarterly journal of experimental psychology (2006), 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Iconicity as an organizing principle of the lexicon.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Giovanni CassaniDepartment of Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3917-3315
Niklas LimacherDepartment of Cognitive Science and Artificial Intelligence, Tilburg School of Humanities and Digital Sciences, Tilburg University, Tilburg, The Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

By leveraging Phonology-to-Semantics Consistency (PSC), which quantifies form-meaning systematicity as the semantic similarity between a target word and its phonological nearest neighbours, we document a unique effect of systematicity on Age of Acquisition (AoA). This effect is also found after controlling for the effect of neighbourhood density measured for word forms and lexical semantics and several other standard predictors of AoA. Moreover, we show that the effect of systematicity is not reducible to iconicity. Finally, we extensively probe the reliability of this finding by testing different statistical models, analysing systematicity in phonology and orthography and implementing random baselines, reporting a robust, unique negative effect of systematicity on AoA, such that more systematic words tend to be learned earlier. We discuss the findings in the light of studies on non-arbitrary form-meaning mappings and their role in language learning, focusing on the analogical process at the interface of form and meaning upon which PSC is based and how it could help children infer the semantics of novel words when context is scarce or uninformative, ultimately speeding up word learning.

Indexed as

Language DevelopmentSemanticsChildHumansLearningLinguisticsReproducibility of ResultsAge of acquisitioncomputational psycholinguisticsform-meaning systematicityorthography-semantics-consistencyphonology-semantics-consistency

Identifiers

PMID34609218
PMCPMC9245153

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.