Aging - phonology Flashcards
(Tun, O’Kane, & Wingfield, 2002)
• Older adults’ speech (word) recall more impacted by the presence of distractors, especially when distractors were semantically meaningful, whereas recall by young adults does not depend on the relatedness of the distractors. However, young adults were more likely to recognize the related distractors later
Sommers & Danielson, 1999
• In spoken word recognition tasks, older adults are less able to inhibit lexical competitors (indexed by greater RT differences in identification of hard words – although the effect is mediated by the additional of semantic context), are more likely to produce errors consisting of lexical neighbors (when instructed to write down the item they heard), especially for difficult words. Hierarchical linear regression analysis indicated that, independent of age/demographics, inhibition accounted for 36% of the variance in identification of difficult words in low-context sentence, and 20% in identification of difficult words in high context sentences. Results not accounted for by processing speed
Madden, 1988
• In a visual word recognition study, older adults were slower to identify sentence-final words than younger adults
Madden 1992
• Effects of age on visual word recognition were not fully attenuated when visual acuity was added as a covariate
Connelly, Hasher, & Zacks, 1991
• Older adults reading times (but not comprehension accuracy) slowed in the presence of extraneous material. Older adults were differentially slowed by text-relevant distractors (compared to text-irrelevant), whereas young adults were equally slowed by both conditions
Burke, MacKay, Worthley, & Wade, 1991
• Older adults exhibit more TOT states, demonstrated by experimental techniques and in natural production (indexed via retrospective interview, diary collections, and experimental elicitations) than younger adults. They also report a decreased number of persistent alternatives in TOT states. Especially vulnerable to TOT are people’s names, object names, adjectives/verbs, and proper names
MacKay, Connor, Albert, & Obler, 2002
• In a naming task using the BNT and the ANT, age-related declines in naming were observed between 50-year-old group and 70-year-old group, affecting the naming of both objects and actions equally when the tests were carefully matched for difficulty
MacKay, Connor, Albert, & Obler, 2002
o In a naming study, phonemic cues yielded greater benefits on naming performance than semantic cues, especially for 60- and 70-year-old age groups
MacKay & Abrams, 1998
• In a study in which young, old, and old-old adults were required to listen to difficult to spell words, then spell them at their own pace, misspellings increased with age, especially for high-frequency words (with perceptual errors and differences in vocabulary factored out). With regularly spelled words, older adults produced more same- and different-pronunciation misspellings. But for irregularly spelled words, older adults only produce more same-pronunciation misspellings. Old adults were also aware of their inability to spell (indicated by a questionnaire). These results resemble declines in SWR.
MacKay & James, 2004
• Elicited speech errors exhibit selective age-effects: older individuals produced more omissions (especially involving inflectional endings) than young adults, and exhibited difficulties with context-based and Lashley sequencing processes related to phonology and morphology. Older adults more likely to produce certain slips of the tongue
Allen, Bucur, Work, & Madden, 2011
o In a word-naming study that varied orthographic encoding (case type), lexical access (word frequency) and phonological regularity (regular vs. irregular), older adults showed larger case-mixing effects than younger adults, but no difference in lexical access or phonological regularity effects. Lexical access skills remain stable in orthographic/semantic and phonological routes, but they may take longer due to the need to clean up noisy perceptual information
