Corpus-based estimates of word association predict biases in judgment of word co-occurrence likelihood

•Word association in linguistics and confirmation in epistemology are related notions.•The same factors underlie both inductive reasoning and linguistic knowledge.•Confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood of word co-occurrence.•The effect is stable across three different experimental s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Cognitive psychology 2014-11, Vol.74 (Nov), p.66-83
Hauptverfasser: Paperno, Denis, Marelli, Marco, Tentori, Katya, Baroni, Marco
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 83
container_issue Nov
container_start_page 66
container_title Cognitive psychology
container_volume 74
creator Paperno, Denis
Marelli, Marco
Tentori, Katya
Baroni, Marco
description •Word association in linguistics and confirmation in epistemology are related notions.•The same factors underlie both inductive reasoning and linguistic knowledge.•Confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood of word co-occurrence.•The effect is stable across three different experimental settings. This paper draws a connection between statistical word association measures used in linguistics and confirmation measures from epistemology. Having theoretically established the connection, we replicate, in the new context of the judgments of word co-occurrence, an intriguing finding from the psychology of reasoning, namely that confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood. We show that the effect, despite being based in this case on very subtle statistical insights about thousands of words, is stable across three different experimental settings. Our theoretical and empirical results suggest that factors affecting traditional reasoning tasks are also at play when linguistic knowledge is probed, and they provide further evidence for the importance of confirmation in a new domain.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.07.001
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1738473020</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0010028514000541</els_id><sourcerecordid>1564352247</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-1515cc3f98a09f61fb9a7d07cfdadd28f109b60ebb73d458d881f4695d311a5a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkU2L1TAUhoMozp2rf2EIiOCm9SRtPrpTLuoIA250HdJ8zKT2NjVplfn3ptw7I7iZVSA85-W850HoikBNgPD3Q23i7ZzvzV1NgbQ1iBqAPEM7Ah2rGKfNc7QrP1ABlewCXeY8AADlnL1EF5QRRhoud8gfYprXXPU6O4tdXsJRLy7j6PGfmCzWOUcT9BLihOfkbDAL7kOBMw4THlZ7e3TT8oibWEVj1pTcZBwew083hrsY7Sv0wusxu9fnd49-fP70_XBd3Xz78vXw8aYyLeuWqmzFjGl8JzV0nhPfd1pYEMZbbS2VvrTrObi-F41tmbRSEt_yjtmGEM10s0fvTrlzir_WUkcdQzZuHPXk4poVEY1sRQMUnkYZbxtGacH36M1_6BDXNJUiG8WEZFy0heInyqSYc3JezalcM90rAmqTpgb1IE1t0hQIVRSVwatz_NofnX0ce7BUgLdnQGejR5_0ZEL-x0nJGOVb0IcT58qJfweXVDZhM2FDcmZRNoandvkLUyC5Ag</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1565785674</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Corpus-based estimates of word association predict biases in judgment of word co-occurrence likelihood</title><source>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</source><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Paperno, Denis ; Marelli, Marco ; Tentori, Katya ; Baroni, Marco</creator><creatorcontrib>Paperno, Denis ; Marelli, Marco ; Tentori, Katya ; Baroni, Marco</creatorcontrib><description>•Word association in linguistics and confirmation in epistemology are related notions.•The same factors underlie both inductive reasoning and linguistic knowledge.•Confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood of word co-occurrence.•The effect is stable across three different experimental settings. This paper draws a connection between statistical word association measures used in linguistics and confirmation measures from epistemology. Having theoretically established the connection, we replicate, in the new context of the judgments of word co-occurrence, an intriguing finding from the psychology of reasoning, namely that confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood. We show that the effect, despite being based in this case on very subtle statistical insights about thousands of words, is stable across three different experimental settings. Our theoretical and empirical results suggest that factors affecting traditional reasoning tasks are also at play when linguistic knowledge is probed, and they provide further evidence for the importance of confirmation in a new domain.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0010-0285</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1095-5623</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.07.001</identifier><identifier>PMID: 25151368</identifier><identifier>CODEN: CGPSBQ</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Amsterdam: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Algorithms ; Bias ; Biological and medical sciences ; Cognitive psychology ; Confirmation ; Epistemology ; Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology ; Humans ; Judgment ; Language ; Linguistic corpora ; Linguistics ; Linguistics - methods ; Miscellaneous ; Probability ; Probability judgment ; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry ; Psychology. Psychophysiology ; Statistics as Topic ; Word association</subject><ispartof>Cognitive psychology, 2014-11, Vol.74 (Nov), p.66-83</ispartof><rights>2014 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><rights>Copyright Academic Press Nov 2014</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-1515cc3f98a09f61fb9a7d07cfdadd28f109b60ebb73d458d881f4695d311a5a3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-1515cc3f98a09f61fb9a7d07cfdadd28f109b60ebb73d458d881f4695d311a5a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0010028514000541$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3536,27902,27903,30977,65308</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=28855261$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25151368$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Paperno, Denis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marelli, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tentori, Katya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baroni, Marco</creatorcontrib><title>Corpus-based estimates of word association predict biases in judgment of word co-occurrence likelihood</title><title>Cognitive psychology</title><addtitle>Cogn Psychol</addtitle><description>•Word association in linguistics and confirmation in epistemology are related notions.•The same factors underlie both inductive reasoning and linguistic knowledge.•Confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood of word co-occurrence.•The effect is stable across three different experimental settings. This paper draws a connection between statistical word association measures used in linguistics and confirmation measures from epistemology. Having theoretically established the connection, we replicate, in the new context of the judgments of word co-occurrence, an intriguing finding from the psychology of reasoning, namely that confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood. We show that the effect, despite being based in this case on very subtle statistical insights about thousands of words, is stable across three different experimental settings. Our theoretical and empirical results suggest that factors affecting traditional reasoning tasks are also at play when linguistic knowledge is probed, and they provide further evidence for the importance of confirmation in a new domain.</description><subject>Algorithms</subject><subject>Bias</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Cognitive psychology</subject><subject>Confirmation</subject><subject>Epistemology</subject><subject>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Judgment</subject><subject>Language</subject><subject>Linguistic corpora</subject><subject>Linguistics</subject><subject>Linguistics - methods</subject><subject>Miscellaneous</subject><subject>Probability</subject><subject>Probability judgment</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</subject><subject>Psychology. Psychophysiology</subject><subject>Statistics as Topic</subject><subject>Word association</subject><issn>0010-0285</issn><issn>1095-5623</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>7QJ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkU2L1TAUhoMozp2rf2EIiOCm9SRtPrpTLuoIA250HdJ8zKT2NjVplfn3ptw7I7iZVSA85-W850HoikBNgPD3Q23i7ZzvzV1NgbQ1iBqAPEM7Ah2rGKfNc7QrP1ABlewCXeY8AADlnL1EF5QRRhoud8gfYprXXPU6O4tdXsJRLy7j6PGfmCzWOUcT9BLihOfkbDAL7kOBMw4THlZ7e3TT8oibWEVj1pTcZBwew083hrsY7Sv0wusxu9fnd49-fP70_XBd3Xz78vXw8aYyLeuWqmzFjGl8JzV0nhPfd1pYEMZbbS2VvrTrObi-F41tmbRSEt_yjtmGEM10s0fvTrlzir_WUkcdQzZuHPXk4poVEY1sRQMUnkYZbxtGacH36M1_6BDXNJUiG8WEZFy0heInyqSYc3JezalcM90rAmqTpgb1IE1t0hQIVRSVwatz_NofnX0ce7BUgLdnQGejR5_0ZEL-x0nJGOVb0IcT58qJfweXVDZhM2FDcmZRNoandvkLUyC5Ag</recordid><startdate>20141101</startdate><enddate>20141101</enddate><creator>Paperno, Denis</creator><creator>Marelli, Marco</creator><creator>Tentori, Katya</creator><creator>Baroni, Marco</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>Elsevier</general><general>Academic Press</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QJ</scope><scope>7TK</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>7T9</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20141101</creationdate><title>Corpus-based estimates of word association predict biases in judgment of word co-occurrence likelihood</title><author>Paperno, Denis ; Marelli, Marco ; Tentori, Katya ; Baroni, Marco</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c459t-1515cc3f98a09f61fb9a7d07cfdadd28f109b60ebb73d458d881f4695d311a5a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Algorithms</topic><topic>Bias</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Cognitive psychology</topic><topic>Confirmation</topic><topic>Epistemology</topic><topic>Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Judgment</topic><topic>Language</topic><topic>Linguistic corpora</topic><topic>Linguistics</topic><topic>Linguistics - methods</topic><topic>Miscellaneous</topic><topic>Probability</topic><topic>Probability judgment</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry</topic><topic>Psychology. Psychophysiology</topic><topic>Statistics as Topic</topic><topic>Word association</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Paperno, Denis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Marelli, Marco</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tentori, Katya</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Baroni, Marco</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Applied Social Sciences Index &amp; Abstracts (ASSIA)</collection><collection>Neurosciences Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>Linguistics and Language Behavior Abstracts (LLBA)</collection><jtitle>Cognitive psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Paperno, Denis</au><au>Marelli, Marco</au><au>Tentori, Katya</au><au>Baroni, Marco</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Corpus-based estimates of word association predict biases in judgment of word co-occurrence likelihood</atitle><jtitle>Cognitive psychology</jtitle><addtitle>Cogn Psychol</addtitle><date>2014-11-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>74</volume><issue>Nov</issue><spage>66</spage><epage>83</epage><pages>66-83</pages><issn>0010-0285</issn><eissn>1095-5623</eissn><coden>CGPSBQ</coden><abstract>•Word association in linguistics and confirmation in epistemology are related notions.•The same factors underlie both inductive reasoning and linguistic knowledge.•Confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood of word co-occurrence.•The effect is stable across three different experimental settings. This paper draws a connection between statistical word association measures used in linguistics and confirmation measures from epistemology. Having theoretically established the connection, we replicate, in the new context of the judgments of word co-occurrence, an intriguing finding from the psychology of reasoning, namely that confirmation values affect intuitions about likelihood. We show that the effect, despite being based in this case on very subtle statistical insights about thousands of words, is stable across three different experimental settings. Our theoretical and empirical results suggest that factors affecting traditional reasoning tasks are also at play when linguistic knowledge is probed, and they provide further evidence for the importance of confirmation in a new domain.</abstract><cop>Amsterdam</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>25151368</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.07.001</doi><tpages>18</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0010-0285
ispartof Cognitive psychology, 2014-11, Vol.74 (Nov), p.66-83
issn 0010-0285
1095-5623
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1738473020
source Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA); MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Algorithms
Bias
Biological and medical sciences
Cognitive psychology
Confirmation
Epistemology
Fundamental and applied biological sciences. Psychology
Humans
Judgment
Language
Linguistic corpora
Linguistics
Linguistics - methods
Miscellaneous
Probability
Probability judgment
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychology. Psychophysiology
Statistics as Topic
Word association
title Corpus-based estimates of word association predict biases in judgment of word co-occurrence likelihood
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-27T10%3A01%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Corpus-based%20estimates%20of%20word%20association%20predict%20biases%20in%20judgment%20of%20word%20co-occurrence%20likelihood&rft.jtitle=Cognitive%20psychology&rft.au=Paperno,%20Denis&rft.date=2014-11-01&rft.volume=74&rft.issue=Nov&rft.spage=66&rft.epage=83&rft.pages=66-83&rft.issn=0010-0285&rft.eissn=1095-5623&rft.coden=CGPSBQ&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.cogpsych.2014.07.001&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1564352247%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1565785674&rft_id=info:pmid/25151368&rft_els_id=S0010028514000541&rfr_iscdi=true