ResearchTrend.AI
  • Papers
  • Communities
  • Events
  • Blog
  • Pricing
Papers
Communities
Social Events
Terms and Conditions
Pricing
Parameter LabParameter LabTwitterGitHubLinkedInBlueskyYoutube

© 2025 ResearchTrend.AI, All rights reserved.

  1. Home
  2. Papers
  3. 2207.00430
68
16
v1v2v3 (latest)

How trial-to-trial learning shapes mappings in the mental lexicon: Modelling Lexical Decision with Linear Discriminative Learning

1 July 2022
Maria Heitmeier
Yu-Ying Chuang
R. Baayen
    CLL
ArXiv (abs)PDFHTML
Abstract

Trial-to-trial effects have been found in a number of studies, indicating that processing a stimulus influences responses in subsequent trials. A special case are priming effects which have been modelled successfully with error-driven learning (Marsolek, 2008), implying that participants are continuously learning during experiments. This study investigates whether trial-to-trial learning can be detected in an unprimed lexical decision experiment. We used the Discriminative Lexicon Model (DLM; Baayen et al., 2019), a model of the mental lexicon with meaning representations from distributional semantics, which models error-driven incremental learning with the Widrow-Hoff rule. We used data from the British Lexicon Project (BLP; Keuleers et al., 2012) and simulated the lexical decision experiment with the DLM on a trial-by-trial basis for each subject individually. Then, reaction times were predicted with Generalised Additive Models (GAMs), using measures derived from the DLM simulations as predictors. We extracted measures from two simulations per subject (one with learning updates between trials and one without), and used them as input to two GAMs. Learning-based models showed better model fit than the non-learning ones for the majority of subjects. Our measures also provide insights into lexical processing and individual differences. This demonstrates the potential of the DLM to model behavioural data and leads to the conclusion that trial-to-trial learning can indeed be detected in unprimed lexical decision. Our results support the possibility that our lexical knowledge is subject to continuous changes.

View on arXiv
Comments on this paper