The Revised Hierarchical Model

A critical review and assessment

Judith F. Kroll, Adriana Van Hell, Natasha Tokowicz, David W. Green

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

154 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)373-381
Number of pages9
JournalBilingualism
Volume13
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Jul 1 2010

Fingerprint

history
Hierarchical Model
Critical Review
evidence
History
language
learning
Bilingual Word Recognition
Language Acquisition
Lexical Processing
Connectionist Models
Word Recognition
Lexical Form
time

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Education
  • Language and Linguistics
  • Linguistics and Language

Cite this

Kroll, Judith F. ; Van Hell, Adriana ; Tokowicz, Natasha ; Green, David W. / The Revised Hierarchical Model : A critical review and assessment. In: Bilingualism. 2010 ; Vol. 13, No. 3. pp. 373-381.
@article{bb3d068ac575439fa01a918acbfac6cf,
title = "The Revised Hierarchical Model: A critical review and assessment",
abstract = "Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.",
author = "Kroll, {Judith F.} and {Van Hell}, Adriana and Natasha Tokowicz and Green, {David W.}",
year = "2010",
month = "7",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1017/S136672891000009X",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "373--381",
journal = "Bilingualism: Language and Cognition",
issn = "1366-7289",
publisher = "Cambridge University Press",
number = "3",

}

The Revised Hierarchical Model : A critical review and assessment. / Kroll, Judith F.; Van Hell, Adriana; Tokowicz, Natasha; Green, David W.

In: Bilingualism, Vol. 13, No. 3, 01.07.2010, p. 373-381.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

TY - JOUR

T1 - The Revised Hierarchical Model

T2 - A critical review and assessment

AU - Kroll, Judith F.

AU - Van Hell, Adriana

AU - Tokowicz, Natasha

AU - Green, David W.

PY - 2010/7/1

Y1 - 2010/7/1

N2 - Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.

AB - Brysbaert and Duyck (this issue) suggest that it is time to abandon the Revised Hierarchical Model (Kroll and Stewart, 1994) in favor of connectionist models such as BIA+ (Dijkstra and Van Heuven, 2002) that more accurately account for the recent evidence on non-selective access in bilingual word recognition. In this brief response, we first review the history of the Revised Hierarchical Model (RHM), consider the set of issues that it was proposed to address and then evaluate the evidence that supports and fails to support the initial claims of the model. Although fifteen years of new research findings require a number of revisions to the RHM, we argue that the central issues to which the model was addressed, the way in which new lexical forms are mapped to meaning and the consequence of language learning history for lexical processing, cannot be accounted for solely within models of word recognition.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=77957993935&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=77957993935&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1017/S136672891000009X

DO - 10.1017/S136672891000009X

M3 - Review article

VL - 13

SP - 373

EP - 381

JO - Bilingualism: Language and Cognition

JF - Bilingualism: Language and Cognition

SN - 1366-7289

IS - 3

ER -