Characterizing language production across modalities

References

• Alario, F. X., & Ferrand, L. (1999). A set of 400 pictures standardized for French: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, and age of acquisition. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers: A Journal of the Psychonomic Society, Inc, 31(3), 531–552. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200732
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Alario, F. X., Ferrand, L., Laganaro, M., New, B., Frauenfelder, U. H., & Segui, J. (2004). Predictors of picture naming speed. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 36(1), 140–155. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195559
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barca, L., Burani, C., & Arduino, L. S. (2002). Word naming times and psycholinguistic norms for Italian nouns. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 34(3), 424–434. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195471
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Barry, C., Morrison, C. M., & Ellis, A. W. (1997). Naming the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures: Effects of age of acquisition, frequency, and name agreement. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A: Human Experimental Psychology, 50(3), 560–585. https://doi.org/10.1080/783663595
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bates, D., Maechler, M., & Dai, B. (2008). lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using s4 classes, version 0.999375-28. R package.
   Google Scholar
• Bates, E., D’Amico, S., Jacobsen, T., Székely, A., Andonova, E., Devescovi, A., Herron, D., Ching Lu, C., Pechmann, T., Pléh, C., & Wicha, N. (2003). Timed picture naming in seven languages. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 10(2), 344–380. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196494
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baus, C., Carreiras, M., & Emmorey, K. (2013). When does iconicity in sign language matter? Language and Cognitive Processes, 28(3), 261–271. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01690965.2011.620374
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Baus, C., & Costa, A. (2015). On the temporal dynamics of sign production: An ERP study in Catalan Sign Language (LSC). Brain Research, 1609(1), 40–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.brainres.2015.03.013
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Bock, K., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Language production: Grammatical encoding. In M. A. Gernsbacher (Ed.), Handbook of psycholinguistics (pp. 945–984). San Diego: Academic Press.
   Google Scholar
• Bonin, P., Chalard, M., Méot, A., & Fayol, M. (2002). The determinants of spoken and written picture naming latencies. British Journal of Psychology, 93(1), 89–114. https://doi.org/10.1348/000712602162463
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonin, P., & Fayol, M. (2002). Frequency effects in the written and spoken production of homophonic picture names. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 14(3), 289–313. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440143000078
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonin, P., Fayol, M., & Chalard, M. (2001). Age of acquisition and word frequency in written picture naming. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology Section A, 54(2), 469–489. https://doi.org/10.1080/713755968
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Bonin, P., Peereman, R., Malardier, N., Méot, A., & Chalard, M. (2003). A new set of 299 pictures for psycholinguistic studies: French norms for name agreement, image agreement, conceptual familiarity, visual complexity, image variability, age of acquisition, and naming latencies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 35(1), 158–167. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03195507
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Boukadi, M., Zouaidi, C., & Wilson, M. A. (2016). Norms for name agreement, familiarity, subjective frequency, and imageability for 348 object names in Tunisian Arabic. Behavior Research Methods, 48(2), 585–599. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0602-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Caselli, N. K., Sehyr, Z. S., Cohen-Goldberg, A. M., & Emmorey, K. (2017). ASL-LEX: A lexical database of American Sign Language. Behavior Research Methods, 49(2), 784–801. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-016-0742-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chalard, M., Bonin, P., Méot, A., Boyer, B., & Fayol, M. (2003). Objective age-of-acquisition (AoA) norms for a set of 230 object names in French: Relationships with psycholinguistic variables, the English data from Morrison et al. (1997), and naming latencies. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 15(2), 209–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09541440244000076
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Davis, C. J., & Perea, M. (2005). BuscaPalabras: A program for deriving orthographic and phonological neighborhood statistics and other psycholinguistic indices in Spanish. Behavior Research Methods, 37(4), 665–671. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03192738
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• de Groot, A. M. (1992). Bilingual lexical representation: A closer look at conceptual representations. Advances in Psychology, 94, 389–412. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0166411508628058.
   Google Scholar
• Dell, G. S. (1986). A spreading-activation theory of retrieval in sentence production. Psychological Review, 93(3), 283–321. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-295X.93.3.283
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emmorey, K., Petrich, J. A., & Gollan, T. H. (2013). Bimodal bilingualism and the frequency-lag hypothesis. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 18(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/ens034
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Emmorey, K., Petrich, J. A. F., & Gollan, T. H. (2012). Bilingual processing of ASL-English code-blends: The consequences of accessing two lexical representations simultaneously. Journal of Memory and Language, 67(1), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.04.005
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Frishberg, N. (1975). Arbitrariness and iconicity: Historical change in American sign language. Language, 51(3), 696. https://doi.org/10.2307/412894
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gimeno-Martínez, M., & Baus, C. (2022). Iconicity in sign language production: Task matters. Neuropsychologia, 167, 108166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2022.108166
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gollan, T. H., Montoya, R., Cera, C., & Sandoval, T. (2008). More use almost always means a smaller frequency effect: Aging, bilingualism, and the weaker links hypothesis. Journal of Memory and Language, 58(3), 787–814. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.07.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Graham, J. W., Olchowski, A. E., & Gilreath, T. D. (2007). How many imputations are really needed? Some practical clarifications of multiple imputation theory. Prevention Science, 8(3), 206–213. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11121-007-0070-9
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heikkola, L. M., Kuzmina, E., & Jensen, B. U. (2022). Predictors of object naming in aphasia: Does cognitive control mediate the effects of psycholinguistic variables? Aphasiology, 36(11), 1275–1292. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2021.1950607
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hohenberger, A., Happ, D., & Leuninger, H. (2002). Modality and structure in signed and spoken languages. In Modality and Structure in Signed and Spoken Languages, 112–142. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511486777.006
   Google Scholar
• Hothorn, T., Hornik, K., Strobl, C., & Zeileis, A. (2015). Package “party.” Cran.Microsoft.Com. https://cran.microsoft.com/snapshot/2015-04-17/web/packages/party/party.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Jescheniak, J. D., & Levelt, W. J. M. (1994). Word frequency effects in speech production: Retrieval of syntactic information and of phonological form. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 20(4), 824–843. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.20.4.824
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kuhn, M., Wing, J., Weston, S., & Williams, A. (2020). Package “caret.”. The R Journal, 223(7), http://cran.radicaldevelop.com/web/packages/caret/caret.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Kursa, M., Rudnicki, W., & Journal, M. K.-T. R. (2018). Package “Boruta.”. The R Journal, 15.
   Google Scholar
• Laganaro, M. (2023). Time-course of phonetic (motor speech) encoding in utterance production. Cognitive Neuropsychology, 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/02643294.2023.2279739
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Levelt, W. J. M., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (1999). A theory of lexical access in speech production. 1–75.
   Google Scholar
• López Zunini, R. A., Baart, M., Samuel, A. G., & Armstrong, B. C. (2020). Lexical access versus lexical decision processes for auditory, visual, and audiovisual items: Insights from behavioral and neural measures. Neuropsychologia, 137), https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2019.107305
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mädebach, A., Jescheniak, J. D., Oppermann, F., & Schriefers, H. (2011). Ease of processing constrains the activation flow in the conceptual-lexical system during speech planning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 37(3), 649–660. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0022330
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mainz, N., Shao, Z., Brysbaert, M., & Meyer, A. S. (2017). Vocabulary knowledge predicts lexical processing: Evidence from a group of participants with diverse educational backgrounds. Frontiers in Psychology, 8(JUL), https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01164
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Marques, J. F., Fonseca, F. L., Morais, S., & Pinto, I. A. (2007). Estimated age of acquisition norms for 834 Portuguese nouns and their relation with other psycholinguistic variables. Behavior Research Methods, 39(3), 439–444. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193013
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGarry, M. E., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Emmorey, K. (2023). How (and why) does iconicity effect lexical access: An electrophysiological study of American sign language. Neuropsychologia, 183, 108516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2023.108516
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McGarry, M. E., Mott, M., Midgley, K. J., Holcomb, P. J., & Emmorey, K. (2020). Picture-naming in American Sign Language: An electrophysiological study of the effects of iconicity and structured alignment. Language, Cognition and Neuroscience, 36(0), 199–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/23273798.2020.1804601
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Miozzo, M., Pulvermüller, F., & Hauk, O. (2015). Early parallel activation of semantics and phonology in picture naming: Evidence from a multiple linear regression MEG study. Cerebral Cortex, 25(10), 3343–3355. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhu137
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mizumoto, A. (2022). Calculating the relative importance of multiple regression predictor variables using dominance analysis and random forests. Language Learning, https://doi.org/10.1111/lang.12518
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrison, C. M., Ellis, A. W., & Quinlan, P. T. (1992). Age of acquisition, not word frequency, affects object naming, not object recognition. Memory & Cognition, 20(6), 705–714. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03202720
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navarrete, E., Caccaro, A., Pavani, F., Mahon, B. Z., & Peressotti, F. (2015). With or without semantic mediation: Retrieval of lexical representations in sign production. Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 20(2), 163–171. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enu045
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Navarrete, E., Peressotti, F., Lerose, L., & Miozzo, M. (2017). Activation cascading in sign production. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 43(2), 302–318. https://doi.org/10.1037/xlm0000312
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pérez, M. A. (2007). Age of acquisition persists as the main factor in picture naming when cumulative word frequency and frequency trajectory are controlled. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 60(1), 32–42. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470210600577423
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perret, C., & Bonin, P. (2019). Which variables should be controlled for to investigate picture naming in adults? A Bayesian meta-analysis. Behavior Research Methods, 51(6), 2533–2545. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-018-1100-1
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pretato, E., Peressotti, F., Bertone, C., & Navarrete, E. (2018). The iconicity advantage in sign production: The case of bimodal bilinguals. Second Language Research, 34(4), 449–462. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658317744009
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Prior, A., Macwhinney, B., & Kroll, J. F. (2007). Translation norms for English and Spanish: The role of lexical variables, word class, and L2 proficiency in negotiating translation ambiguity. Behavior Research Methods, 39(4), 1029–1038. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03193001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sandler, W., & Lillo-Martin, D. (2006). Sign language and linguistic universals. Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Sanfeliu, M. C., & Fernandez, A. (1996). A set of 254 Snodgrass-Vanderwart pictures standardized for Spanish: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28(4), 537–555. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200541
   Google Scholar
• Sassenhagen, J., Schlesewsky, M., & Bornkessel-Schlesewsky, I. (2014). The P600-as-P3 hypothesis revisited: Single-trial analyses reveal that the late EEG positivity following linguistically deviant material is reaction time aligned. Brain and Language, 137, 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2014.07.010
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sehyr, Z. S., Caselli, N., Cohen-Goldberg, A. M., & Emmorey, K. (2021). The ASL-LEX 2.0 Project: A Database of Lexical and Phonological Properties for 2,723 Signs in American Sign Language. The Journal of Deaf Studies and Deaf Education, 26(2), 263–277. https://doi.org/10.1093/deafed/enaa038
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sehyr, Z. S., & Emmorey, K. (2022). The effects of multiple linguistic variables on picture naming in American Sign Language. Behavior Research Methods, 54(5), 2502–2521. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-021-01751-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shao, Z., & Stiegert, J. (2016). Predictors of photo naming: Dutch norms for 327 photos. Behavior Research Methods, 48(2), 577–584. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-015-0613-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Snodgrass, J. G., & Vanderwart, M. (1980). A standardized set of 260 pictures: Norms for name agreement, image agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Learning and Memory, 6(2), 174–215. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.6.2.174
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Snodgrass, J. G., & Yuditsky, T. (1996). Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers, 28(4), 516–536. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03200540
   Google Scholar
• Strijkers, K., Baus, C., Runnqvist, E., FitzPatrick, I., & Costa, A. (2013). The temporal dynamics of first versus second language production. Brain and Language, 127(1), 6–11. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.bandl.2013.07.008
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strijkers, K., Costa, A., & NeuroImage, F. (2017). The cortical dynamics of speaking: Lexical and phonological knowledge simultaneously recruit the frontal and temporal cortex within 200 ms. Elsevier, 163, 206–219.
   Google Scholar
• Strijkers, K., Costa, A., & Thierry, G. (2010). Tracking lexical access in speech production: Electrophysiological correlates of word frequency and cognate effects. Cerebral Cortex, 20(4), 912–928. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhp153
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Strobl, C., Boulesteix, A. L., Zeileis, A., & Hothorn, T. (2007). Bias in random forest variable importance measures: Illustrations, sources and a solution. BMC Bioinformatics, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2105-8-25
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Torrance, M., Nottbusch, G., Alves, R. A., Arfé, B., Chanquoy, L., Chukharev-Hudilainen, E., Dimakos, I., Fidalgo, R., Hyönä, J., Jóhannesson, ÓI, & Madjarov, G. (2018). Timed written picture naming in 14 European languages. Behavior Research Methods, 50, 744–758. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-017-0902-x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Trettenbrein, P. C., Pendzich, N. K., Cramer, J. M., et al. (2021). Psycholinguistic norms for more than 300 lexical signs in German Sign Language (DGS). Behavior Research Methods, 53(5), 1817–1832. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-020-01524-y
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valente, A., Bürki, A., & Laganaro, M. (2014). ERP correlates of word production predictors in picture naming: A trial by trial multiple regression analysis from stimulus onset to response. Frontiers in Neuroscience, 8(DEC), 390. https://doi.org/10.3389/fnins.2014.00390
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• van Buuren, S., Groothuis-Oudshoorn, K., Robitzsch, A., Vink, G., Doove, L., & Jolani, S. (2015). Package “mice.” Computer Software. https://cran.microsoft.com/snapshot/2014-11-17/web/packages/mice/mice.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Vinson, D., Thompson, R. L., Skinner, R., & Vigliocco, G. (2015). A faster path between meaning and form? Iconicity facilitates sign recognition and production in British Sign Language. Journal of Memory and Language, 82, 56–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2015.03.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wolna, A., Łuniewska, M., Haman, E., & Wodniecka, Z. (2022). Polish norms for a set of colored drawings of 168 objects and 146 actions with predictors of naming performance. Behavior Research Methods, 2706–2732. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13428-022-01923-3
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yap, M. J., Balota, D. A., Sibley, D. E., & Ratcliff, R. (2012). Individual differences in visual word recognition: Insights from the English Lexicon Project. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 38(1), 53–79. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024177
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, Q., Zhou, Y., & Lou, H. (2022). The dissociation between age of acquisition and word frequency effects in Chinese spoken picture naming. Psychological Research, 86(6), 1918–1929. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00426-021-01616-0
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar