Table 4.
Dimensions on which animate and inanimate word lists were matched in Experiment 2
| Dimension (range of the rating scale) | Animate | Inanimate | Comparison | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| M | SD | M | SD | ||
| Semantic typicality (1–7) | 2.39 | 0.94 | 2.61 | 1.36 | t(137.17) = 1.21, p = .228, d = 0.19 |
| Age of acquisition (1–7) | 3.35 | 1.20 | 3.42 | 1.18 | t(154) = 0.36, p = .718, d = 0.06 |
| Conceptual familiarity (1–5) | 3.19 | 0.58 | 3.33 | 0.82 | t(138.11) = 1.29, p = .199, d = 0.21 |
| Word frequency | 9.33 | 17.82 | 8.89 | 18.46 | t(154) = 0.15 p = .878, d = 0.02 |
| Number of phonemes | 5.03 | 1.55 | 4.92 | 1.37 | t(154) = 0.44, p = .661, d = 0.07 |
| Number of syllables | 2.03 | 0.81 | 2.00 | 0.66 | t(148.64) = 0.22, p = .829, d = 0.03 |
| Number of letters | 6.14 | 1.63 | 5.77 | 1.53 | t(154) = 1.47, p = .144, d = 0.24 |
| Concreteness (1–7) | 5.17 | 0.48 | 5.09 | 0.49 | t(154) = 1.07, p = .285, d = 0.17 |
| Meaningfulness (1–7) | 3.64 | 0.73 | 3.59 | 0.76 | t(154) = 0.47, p = .637, d = 0.08 |
| Imagery (1–7) | 5.48 | 0.94 | 5.48 | 0.96 | t(154) < 0.01, p = .998, d < 0.01 |
In Experiment 2, two animate and two inanimate words were excluded from the stimulus set used in Experiment 1. Norming data were taken from Schröder et al. (2012) and Meinhardt et al. (2020). Words were selected so as to minimize, for each dimension, the mean differences between the lists of animate and inanimate words. The rightmost column shows that the lists of animate and inanimate words did not differ significantly on any of the controlled dimensions