Calculating semantic relatedness of lists of nouns using WordNet path length

Lists of semantically related words are better recalled on immediate memory tests than otherwise equivalent lists of unrelated words. However, measuring the degree of relatedness is not straightforward. We report three experiments that assess the ability of various measures of semantic relatedness—i...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Behavior research methods 2021-12, Vol.53 (6), p.2430-2438
Main Authors: Ensor, Tyler M., MacMillan, Molly B., Neath, Ian, Surprenant, Aimée M.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Behavioral Science and Psychology
Cognitive Psychology
Experiments
Humans
Information processing
Language
Memory, Short-Term
Mental Recall
Psychology
Reading
Semantics
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Lists of semantically related words are better recalled on immediate memory tests than otherwise equivalent lists of unrelated words. However, measuring the degree of relatedness is not straightforward. We report three experiments that assess the ability of various measures of semantic relatedness—including latent semantic analysis ( LSA ), GloVe , fastText , and a number of measures based on WordNet—to predict whether two lists of words will be differentially recalled. In Experiment 1, all measures except LSA correctly predicted the observed better recall of the related than the unrelated list. In Experiment 2, all measures except JCN predicted that abstract words would be recalled equally as well as concrete words because of their enhanced semantic relatedness. In Experiment 3, LSA , GLoVe , and fastText predicted an enhanced concreteness effect because the concrete words were more related; three WordNet measures predicted a small concreteness effect because the abstract and concrete words did not differ in semantic relatedness; and three other WordNet measures predicted no concreteness effect because the abstract words were more related than the concrete words. A small concreteness effect was observed. Over the three experiments, only two measures, both based on simple WordNet path length, predicted all three results. We suggest that the results are not unexpected because semantic processing in episodic memory experiments differs from that in reading, similarity judgment, and analogy tasks which are the most common way of assessing such measures.
ISSN:1554-3528
1554-3528
DOI:10.3758/s13428-021-01570-0