The processing of frequency information: An automatic mechanism?
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
College students can accurately estimate the frequency with which words occur in a list.
“College students, for example, can accuratelyestimate the frequencywith which words occur in a list (Hasher & Chromiak, 1977)”
From FREQUENCY EFFECTS IN LANGUAGE PROCESSING: A Review with Implications for Theories of Implicit and Explicit Language Acquisition (2002) · cites this paper as Hasher & Chromiak, 1977
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 36 · Cited by 145
- Authors
- Hasher, L., & Chromiak, W.
- Affiliations
- Temple University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Hasher, Lynn
- Venue
- Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1977-04
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 173-184
- ISSN
- 0022-5371 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2028657064
- Cited by
- 145
- References
- 36
- Citations by year
- 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 3 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 1
- FWCI
- 7.38
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Memory Processes and Influences
- Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Neurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
- Keywords
- frequency information, frequency judgment, automatic processing, frequency counting, feedback, practice effects, age differences, children, word frequency, cognitive development
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
