IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v65by2010i5p551-560.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Lexical Neighborhood Density Effects on Spoken Word Recognition and Production in Healthy Aging

Author

Listed:
  • Vanessa Taler
  • Geoffrey P. Aaron
  • Lauren G. Steinmetz
  • David B. Pisoni

Abstract

We examined the effects of lexical competition and word frequency on spoken word recognition and production in healthy aging. Older (n = 16) and younger adults (n = 21) heard and repeated meaningful English sentences presented in the presence of multitalker babble at two signal-to-noise ratios, +10 and - 3 dB. Each sentence contained three keywords of high or low word frequency and phonological neighborhood density (ND). Both participant groups responded less accurately to high- than low-ND stimuli; response latencies (from stimulus offset to response onset) were longer for high- than low-ND sentences, whereas response durations--time from response onset to response offset--were longer for low- than high-ND stimuli. ND effects were strongest for older adults in the most difficult conditions, and ND effects in accuracy were related to inhibitory function. The results suggest that the sentence repetition task described here taps the effects of lexical competition in both perception and production and that these effects are similar across the life span, but that accuracy in the lexical discrimination process is affected by declining inhibitory function in older adults. Copyright 2010, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Vanessa Taler & Geoffrey P. Aaron & Lauren G. Steinmetz & David B. Pisoni, 2010. "Lexical Neighborhood Density Effects on Spoken Word Recognition and Production in Healthy Aging," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 65(5), pages 551-560.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:65b:y:2010:i:5:p:551-560
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbq039
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:65b:y:2010:i:5:p:551-560. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.