Cover not available
Article published In:
The Mental Lexicon
Vol. 13:3 (2018) ► pp.354–387
Methodological and analytic considerations

Imageability, familiarity, and age of acquisition ratings for Arabic abstract nouns, abstract verbs and adjectives

 | Qatar University
 | Qatar University
 | University of Newcastle upon Tyne
 | University of Sheffield
To date, normative psycholinguistics research has mainly focused on establishing norms for producing databases for concrete words using standardized pictures, while abstract words have been subject to much less attention. Understandably, the fact that the first can be represented visually helps in formulating picture-naming tasks to elicit verbal identification for pictures representing nouns and verbs, which greatly contributes to language experiments in both theoretical and clinical studies. The present study argues for the equal importance of studies that aim to develop databases for abstract words, as language use is not restricted to picturable/concrete concepts. We provide norms for a set of 165 abstract nouns, 56 abstract verbs and 109 abstract adjectives, collected from healthy speakers of Arabic. Using rating tasks, norms for imageability, age of acquisition, and familiarity are established. Linguistic factors such as syllable length and phoneme length are also accounted for. We also include orthographic frequency values (extracted from AraLex; Boudelaa and Marslen-Wilson, 2010). The norms for the processing of abstract words collected in the current study present a valuable resource for researchers and clinicians working with speakers of Arabic. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first dataset of abstract words for the Arabic language.
Keywords: Arabic, norms, imageability, familiarity, age of acquisition, abstract, nouns, verbs, adjectives
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Concrete vs Abstract word differences
  • Factors influencing word processing
  • The Arabic language
  • The current study
  • Method
    • Participants
    • Materials
    • Design
    • Procedure
    • Results
  • Discussion
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
Published online: 14 May 2019
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ml.18016.khw
References (75)
References
Akinina, Y., Malyutina, S., Ivanova, M., Iskra, E., Mannova, E., & Dragoy, O. (2015). Russian normative data for 375 action pictures and verbs. Behavior Research Methods, 471, 691–707. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alario, F.-X., Ferrand, L., Laganaro, M., New, B., Frauenfelder, U. H., & Segui, J. (2004). Predictors of naming speed. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 361, 140–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Albirini, A. (2016). Modern Arabic Sociolinguistics. Routledge, London & New York. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Alonso, M. A., Fernandez, A. & Diez, E. (2015). Subjective age-of-acquisition norms for 7,039 Spanish words. Behavior research methods, 471, 268–274. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barber, H. A., Otten, L. J., Kousta, S. T., & Vigliocco, G. (2013). Concreteness in word processing: ERP and behavioral effects in a lexical decision task. Brain and Language, 125(1), 47–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Barca, L., Burani, C., & Arduino, S. L. (2002). Word naming times and psycholinguistic norms for Italian nouns. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 341, 424–434. DOI logoGoogle 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, 50A1, 560–585. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bird, H., Franklin, S. & Howard, D. (2001). Age of acquisition and imageability ratings for a large set of words, including verbs and function words. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, and Computers, 33(1), 73–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Binder, J., Westbury, C., Possing, E., Mckiernean, K. & Medler, D. (2005). Distinct brain systems for processing concrete and abstract concepts, Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 71, 905–917. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonin, P., Méot, A., Chalard, M., & Fayol, M. (2002). The determinants of spoken and written picture naming latencies. British Journal of Psychology, 931, 89–114. DOI logoGoogle 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, 351, 158–167. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bonin, P., Boyer, B., Méot, A., Fayol, M., & Droit, S. (2004). Psycholinguistic norms for action photographs in French and their relationships with spoken and written latencies. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 361, 127–139. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Boudelaa, S., & Marslen-Wilson, W. D. (2010). Aralex: A lexical database for Modern Standard Arabic. Behavior Research Methods, 421, 481–487. DOI logoGoogle 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, 481, 585–599. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brown, G. D. A., & Watson, F. L. (1987). First in, first out: Word learning age and spoken word frequency as predictors of word familiarity and word naming latency. Memory and Cognition, 151, 208–216. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brysbaert, M. (1996). Word frequency affects naming latency in Dutch when age of acquisition is controlled. European Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 81, 185–193. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cameirão, M. L., & Vicente, S. G. (2010). Age-of-acquisition norms for a set of 1,749 Portuguese words. Behavior Research Methods, 421, 474–480. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caroll, J. B., & White, M. N. (1973). Age-of-acquisition norms for 220 picturable nouns. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 121, 563–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cycowicz, Y. M., Friedman, D., Rothstein, M., & Snodgrass, J. G. (1997). Picture naming by young children: norms for name agreement, familiarity, and visual complexity. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 651, 171–237. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dupoux, E. & Mehler, J. (1990). Monitoring the lexicon with normal and compressed speech: Frequency effects and the prelexical code. Journal of Memory & Language 291, 316–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ellis, A., & Lambon Ralph, M. A. (2000). Age of acquisition effects in adult lexical processing reflect loss of plasticity in maturing systems: insights from connectionist networks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition, 26(5), 1103–1123.Google Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 151, 232–351. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gernsbacher, M. (1984). Resolving 20 years of incosistent interactions between lexical familiary and orthography, concreteness and polysemy. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1131:256–281. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J., & Gilhooly, M. L. (1979). Age-of-acquisition effects in lexical and episodic memory tasks. Memory and Cognition, 71, 214–223. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gilhooly, K. J., & Logie, R. H. (1980). Age-of-acquisition, imagery, concreteness, familiarity, and ambiguity measures for 1,944 words. Behavior Research Methods & Instrumentation, 121, 395–427. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(1981). Word age-of-acquisition, reading latencies and auditory recognition. Current Psychological Research, 11, 251–262. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Glaser, W. R. (1992). Picture naming. Cognition, 421, 61–105. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gordon, B. (1985). Subjective frequency and the lexical decision latency function: Implications for mechanisms of lexical access. Journal of Memory & Language 241, 631–645. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hale, B. (1988). Abstract objects. Blackwell.Google Scholar
Holcomb, P. J., Kounios, J., Anderson, J. E. & West, W. C. Dual-coding, context-availability, and concreteness effects in sentence comprehension: An electrophysiological investigation. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 251, 721–42.
Idrissi, Ali & Eva Kehayia. (2004). “Morphological units in the Arabic mental lexicon: Evidence from an individual with deep dyslexia.” Brain and Language 901, 183–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Idrissi, Ali, Jean-François Prunet & Renée Béland. (2008). “On the abstractness of Arabic roots.” Linguistic Inquiry 39(2), 221–259. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khwaileh, T., Body, R. & Herbert, R. (2014). A normative database and determinants of lexical retrieval for 186 Arabic nouns: Effects of psycholinguistic and morpho-syntactic variables on naming latency. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 431, 749–769. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khwaileh, T., Body, R., & Herbert, R. (2017). Lexical retrieval after Arabic aphasia: Syntactic access and predictors of spoken naming. Journal of Neurolinguistics, 421, 140–155. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Khwaileh, T., Mustafawi, E., Herbert, R. & Howard, D. (2018). Gulf Arabic nouns and verbs: A standardized set of 319 object pictures and 141 action pictures, with predictors of naming latencies. Behavior Research Methods, 1–18. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kosslyn, S. M., & Chabris, C. F. (1990). Naming pictures. Journal of Visual Languages and Computing, 11, 77–95. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kousta, S. T., Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Andrews, M., & Del Campo, E. (2011). The representation of abstract words: Why emotion matters. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 1401, 14–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kreuz, R. (1987). The subjective familiarity of English homophones. Memory & Cognition 15(2), 154–168. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lachman, R., Shaffer, J. P., & Hennrikus, D. (1974). Language and cognition: Effects of stimulus codability, name-word frequency, and age of acquisition on lexical reaction time. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 131, 613–625. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Marslen-Wilson, W. (1990). Activation, competition and frequency in lexical access. Cognitive models of speech processing, ed. G. Altmann, 148–172. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Martein, R. (1995). Norms for name and concept agreement, familiarity, visual complexity and image agreement on a set of 216 pictures. Psychologica Belgica, 351, 205–225. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Meschyan, G. & Hernandez, A. (2002). Age of acquisition and word frequency: Determinants of object-naming speed and accuracy. Memory & Cognition, 301, 262–269. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morrison, C. M., Ellis, A. W., & Quinlan, P. T. (1992). Age of acquisition, not word frequency, affects object naming, not object recognition. Memory and Cognition, 201, 705–714. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Morrison, C. M., & Ellis, A. W. (1995). Roles of word frequency and age of acquisition in word naming and lexical decision. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 21(1), 116–133.Google Scholar
Mustafawi, E. (2018). Arabic phonology. In E. Benmamoun and R. Bassiouney, The Routledge Handbook of Arabic linguistics, 11–31. Routledge, New York.Google Scholar
Mustafawi, E. & Shaaban, K. Language Policies in Qatar: From Local to Global Then Back to Local.Language Policy. Published online: 16 Jul. 2018. DOI logo
Nickels, L., & Howard, D. (1995). Phonological Errors in Aphasic Naming: Comprehension, Monitoring and Lexicality. Cortex, 31(2), 209–237.Google Scholar
Nickels, L. (1997). Spoken word production and its breakdown in aphasia. Hove, UK: Psychology Press.Google Scholar
Nusbaum, H. C., Pisoni, D. & Davis, C. (1984). Sizing up the hoosier mental lexicon: Measuring the familiarity of 20,000 words. Research on speech perception, progress report 10, 357–376. Indiana University.Google Scholar
Paivio, A. (1991). Dual coding theory: Retrospect and current status. Canadian Journal of Psychology, 451, 255–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2007). Mind and its evolution: A dual coding theoretical approach. Mahwah, NJ, US: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.Google Scholar
(2013). Dual coding theory, word abstractness, and emotion: a critical review of Kousta et al. (2011). Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 142(1), 282–287. [PubMed] DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2014). Intelligence, dual coding theory, and the brain. Intelligence, 471, 141–158. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A., Clark, J. M., Digdon, N., & Bons, T. (1989). Referential processing: Reciprocity and correlates of naming and imaging. Memory & Cognition, 171, 163–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Paivio, A., Yuille, J. C. & Madigan, S. (1968). Concreteness, imagery, and meaningfulness values for 925 nouns. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 76, (1, Pt. 2) DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pind, J., & Tryggvadottir, H. B. J. (2002). Determinants of picture naming times in Icelandic. Scandanavian Journal of Psychology, 431, 221–226. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Plaut, D. C., & Shallice, T. (1993). Perseverative and semantic influences on visual object naming errors in optic aphasia: A connectionist account. Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience, 51, 89–117. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Prunet, J., Béland, R. & Idrissi, A. (2000). The mental representation of Semitic words. Linguistic Inquiry, 311, 609–648. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Quadflieg, S., Michel, C., Bukowski, H., & Samson, D. (2014). A database of psycholinguistic and lexical properties for French adjectives referring to human and/or nonhuman attributes. Canadian Journal of Experimental Psychology, 681, 67–76. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Raman, I., Raman, E., & Mertan, B. (2014). A standardized set of 260 pictures for Turkish: Norms of name and image agreement, age of acquisition, visual complexity, and conceptual familiarity. Behavior Research, 461, 588–595. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rosa, P., Catricala, E., Vigliocco, G. & Cappa, S. (2010). Beyond the abstract – concrete dichotomy: Mode of acquisition, concreteness, imageability, familiarity, age of acquisition, context availability, and abstractness norms for a set of 417 Italian words. Behavior research methods, 42(4), 1042–1048. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shao, Z., Roelofs, A., & Meyer, A. S. (2013). Predicting naming latencies for action pictures: Dutch norms. Behavior Research Methods, 461, 274–283. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shao, Z., Roelofs, A., Martin, R. C., & Meyer, A. S. (2015). Selective inhibition and naming performance in semantic blocking, pictureword interference, and color-word Stroop tasks. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 41(6), 1806–20.Google Scholar
Schwanenflugel, P. J., Akin, C., & Luh, W. (1992). Context availability and the recall of abstract and concrete words. Memory & Cognition, 201, 96–104. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwanenflugel, P. J., & Stowe, R. W. (1989). Context availability and the processing of abstract and concrete words in sentences. Reading Research Quarterly, 241, 114–126. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwanenflugel, P. J., Harnishfeger, K. K., & Stowe, R. W. (1988). Context avail ability and lexical decisions for abstract and concrete words. Journal of Memory and Language, 271, 499–520. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schwitter, V., Boyer, B., Méot, A., Bonin, P., & Laganaro, M. (2004). French normative data and naming times for action pictures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 361, 564–576. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Segui, J., Mehler, J., Frauenfelder, U. & Morton, J. (1982). The word frequency effect and lexical access. Neuropsychologica, 20(6), 615–627. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Severens, E., Van Lommel, S., Ratinckx, E., & Hartsuiker, R. J. (2005). Timed picture naming norms for 590 pictures in Dutch. Acta Psychologica, 1191, 159–187. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snodgrass, J. G., & Yuditsky, T. (1996). Naming times for the Snodgrass and Vanderwart pictures. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments, & Computers, 281, 516–536. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Snodgrass, J. G., & Corwin, J. (1988). Perceptual identification thresholds for 150 fragmented pictures from the Snodgrass and Vanderwart picture set. Perceptual and Motor Skills, 671, 3–36. DOI logoGoogle 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 & Memory, 61, 174–215.Google Scholar
Stadthagen-Gonzalez, H., & Davis, C. J. (2006). The Bristol norms for age of acquisition, imageability, and familiarity. Behavior Research Methods, 381, 598–605.Google Scholar
Tanaka-Ishii, K. & Terada, H. (2011). Word familiarity and frequency. Studia Linguistica, 65(1), 96–116.Google Scholar
Vigliocco, G., Vinson, D. P., Druks, J., Barber, H., & Cappa, S. F. (2011). Nouns and verbs in the brain: A review of behavioural, electrophysiological, neuropsychological and imaging studies. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 351, 407–426. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Khwaileh, Tariq, Eiman Mustafawi & Yusuf Albustanji
2020. A linguistically-driven response categorisation protocol for Arabic nouns and verbs: clinical and research applications. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics 34:9 ► pp. 861 ff. DOI logo
Łuniewska, Magdalena, Zofia Wodniecka, Carol A. Miller, Filip Smolík, Morna Butcher, Vasiliki Chondrogianni, Edith Kouba Hreich, Camille Messarra, Rogayah A. Razak, Jeanine Treffers-Daller, Ngee Thai Yap, Layal Abboud, Ali Talebi, Maribel Gureghian, Laurice Tuller, Ewa Haman & Ludovic Ferrand
2019. Age of acquisition of 299 words in seven languages: American English, Czech, Gaelic, Lebanese Arabic, Malay, Persian and Western Armenian. PLOS ONE 14:8 ► pp. e0220611 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 8 july 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.