The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Word Frequency Effect: A Review of Recent Developments and Implications for the Choice of Frequency Estimates in German
Abstract
We review recent evidence indicating that researchers in experimental psychology may have used suboptimal estimates of word frequency. Word frequency measures should be based on a corpus of at least 20 million words that contains language participants in psychology experiments are likely to have been exposed to. In addition, the quality of word frequency measures should be ascertained by correlating them with behavioral word processing data. When we apply these criteria to the word frequency measures available for the German language, we find that the commonly used Celex frequencies are the least powerful to predict lexical decision times. Better results are obtained with the Leipzig frequencies, the dlexDB frequencies, and the Google Books 2000–2009 frequencies. However, as in other languages the best performance is observed with subtitle-based word frequencies. The SUBTLEX-DE word frequencies collected for the present ms are made available in easy-to-use files and are free for educational purposes.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The Nature of Recollection and Familiarity: A Review of 30 Years of Research
Yonelinas, A. P. (2002) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1006/jmla.2002.2864 · Cited by 3,840
Brysbaert, M., & New, B. (2009) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/brm.41.4.977 · Cited by 2,821
Self-citationOrthographic processing in visual word recognition: A multiple read-out model.
Grainger, J., & Jacobs, A. M. (1996) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.103.3.518 · Cited by 947
Self-citation
Cited by
Word prevalence norms for 62,000 English lemmas
Brysbaert, M., Mandera, P., McCormick, S. F., & Keuleers, E. (2019) · Behavior Research Methods · doi:10.3758/s13428-018-1077-9 · Cited by 207
Self-citationWhat did we learn from forty years of research on semantic interference? A Bayesian meta-analysis
Bürki, A., Elbuy, S., Madec, S., & Vasishth, S. (2020) · Journal of Memory and Language · doi:10.1016/j.jml.2020.104125 · Cited by 124
Weiss, Z., Riemenschneider, A., Schröter, P., & Meurers, D. (2019) · Proceedings of the Fourteenth Workshop on Innovative Use of NLP for Building Educational Applications · doi:10.18653/v1/w19-4404 · Cited by 13
What is the interference in ‘verbal interference’?
Gerwien, J., von Stutterheim, C., & Rummel, J. (2022) · Acta Psychologica · doi:10.1016/j.actpsy.2022.103774 · Cited by 3
Metadata
- Authors
- Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A.
- Venue
- Experimental Psychology
- Publisher
- Hogrefe Publishing Group
- Published
- 2011-07-01
- Volume
- 58
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 412-424
- ISSN
- 0949-3964 (ISSN-L)
- 1618-3169
- 2190-5142
- OpenAlex
- W2136525955
- Cited by
- 461
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 41.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Word Frequency Effect: A Review of Recent Developments and Implications for the Choice of Frequency Estimates in German. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1027/1618-3169/a000123
- The paper
- Brysbaert, M., Buchmeier, M., Conrad, M., Jacobs, A. M., Bölte, J., & Böhl, A. (2011). The Word Frequency Effect: A Review of Recent Developments and Implications for the Choice of Frequency Estimates in German. Experimental Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1027/1618-3169/a000123
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
