Assessing naming errors using an automated machine learning approach
Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 28, 2025

A Machine Learning Approach to Design an Efficient Selective Screening of Mild Cognitive Impairment
Published on: January 11, 2020
Tatiana T Schnur1, Chia-Ming Lei2
1Department of Neurosurgery and Neuroscience.
Objective:
After left hemisphere stroke, 20%-50% of people experience language deficits, including difficulties in naming. Naming errors that are semantically related to the intended target (e.g., producing "violin" for picture HARP) indicate a potential impairment in accessing knowledge of word forms and their meanings. Understanding the cause of naming impairments is crucial to better modeling of language production as well as for tailoring individualized rehabilitation. However, evaluation of naming errors is typically by subjective and laborious dichotomous classification. As a result, these evaluations do not capture the degree of semantic similarity and are susceptible to lower interrater reliability because of subjectivity.
Method:
We investigated whether a computational linguistic measure using word2vec (Mikolov, Chen, et al., 2013) addressed these limitations by evaluating errors during object naming in a group of patients during the acute stage of a left-hemisphere stroke (N = 105).
Results:
Pearson correlations demonstrated excellent convergent validity of word2vec's semantically related estimates of naming errors and independent tests of access to lexical-semantic knowledge (p < .0001). Further, multiple regression analysis showed word2vec's semantically related estimates were significantly better than human error classification at predicting performance on tests of lexical-semantic knowledge.
Conclusions:
Useful to both theorists and clinicians, our word2vec-based method provides an automated, continuous, and objective psychometric measure of access to lexical-semantic knowledge during naming. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).
More Related Videos
09:00Author Spotlight: Validation of SICOLE-R for Assessing Cognitive and Reading Skills in Spanish-Speaking Children and Its Role in Personalized Education
Published on: August 16, 2024
06:37Author Spotlight: Addressing Technical and Subjective Challenges in Measuring Classroom Attention
Published on: December 15, 2023
Related Concept Videos
Detection of Gross Error: The Q Test
Documentation of Nursing Diagnosis
In some settings, data-driven computerized decision support systems are in place, allowing for more accurate nursing diagnoses. The database within one of these systems includes diagnostic labels defining characteristics, activities, and indicators for nursing. A nurse enters...
Systematic Error: Methodological and Sampling Errors
Sampling errors originate from improper sampling methods or the wrong sample population. These errors can be minimized by refining the sampling strategy. Defective instruments or faulty calibrations are the sources of instrumental...
Types of Errors: Detection and Minimization
Absolute error in a measurement is the numerical difference from the true or central value. Relative error is the ratio between absolute error and the true or central value, expressed as a percentage.
Errors can be classified by source, magnitude, and sign. There are three types of errors: systematic, random, and gross.
Systematic or...