ArticleBehavior research methods2026
Semantic diversity in Chinese words: Exploring its role in word recognition, lexical ambiguity, character complexity, and semantic alignment.
Article in Behavior research methods, 2026. 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
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Semantic diversity (SemD) quantifies how (dis)similar a word's various contextual usages are across linguistic experiences. While extensively validated in English, its application to Chinese-a morpho-syllabic language where most words consist of multiple characters-remains unexplored. Here, we present the first comprehensive SemD database for 25,460 simplified Chinese words spanning one-to-ten characters using context vectors from latent semantic analysis. We evaluate its cognitive validity through five lenses. First, Chinese SemD exhibits systematic relationships with dictionary-based ambiguity, human ratings, and key psycholinguistic variables. Crucially, unscaled SemD shows stronger associations with all factors than scaled variants. Second, higher SemD facilitates recognition speed and accuracy beyond baseline predictors in mega-study lexical decision, with a stronger benefit for low-frequency words-replicating English findings in an ideographic system. Third, both lexical ambiguity types-polysemy and homonymy-positively predict SemD, indicating that words with multiple related senses or unrelated meanings are associated with more diverse contextual usage. However, behavioral and SemD-based analyses convergingly show that only polysemes demonstrate a processing advantage and higher SemD relative to unambiguous controls, whereas homonyms do not differ from controls on either measure. Fourth, words with more characters exhibit lower SemD, extending the Mutual Annotation and Constraint account whereby additional morphemic cues narrow Chinese words' interpretation. Fifth, cross-linguistic analyses demonstrate that English-Chinese translation equivalents with higher semantic alignment exhibit lower mean SemD and smaller between-language SemD disparities. These findings establish SemD as a psychologically meaningful measure of Chinese lexical ambiguity that bridges distributional, morphological, and cross-linguistic perspectives on the mental lexicon.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42236992What 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.