Response frequencies to stimulus words vary widely, with easy words answered correctly by most subjects and hard words such as suave missed by 96%¶
Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · designr2·q2
Currency · newest study 1918 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person
Subclaims¶
Reading the evidence codes
q is the design tier, i the impact, n the sample, and the kind with its r
the rigour judged within that kind: what each code means.
This claim: no standardized effect is recorded in observations/ for it yet, so no benchmark reading is possible.
q2 i? In the 990-response tabulation, difficulty varies widely across the eighty words; suave was missed by 96% of subjects and received the maximum point value of 2.0. → Harry A. Greene 1918
q2 i? Full- and half-value responses were tallied per word; for to win, 700 persons gave to lose (full value) and 72 gave to fail (half value), totaling 736 responses. → Harry A. Greene 1918 (2)
Evidence¶
Harry A. Greene 1918¶
Harry A. Greene. (1918). A Standardization of Certain Opposites Tests. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0070589
q2 · i? · design · r2
A descriptive tabulation of freshmen responses to the opposites list, keyed with the King and Gold standardization. The example reports that "the word suave was missed by 96% of the subjects", illustrating conversion of failure percentage to percentile value 79. No effect size is printed for this descriptive finding.
"For example, the word suave was missed by 96% of the subjects. From the table* a word missed by 96% of the cases is valued at 79."
Harry A. Greene 1918 (2)¶
Harry A. Greene. (1918). A Standardization of Certain Opposites Tests. The Journal of Educational Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0070589
q2 · i? · design · r2
The article's illustrative tabulation rule for scoring responses: full-value answers count as one and half-value answers as one-half, shown with the to win example totaling "736" responses.
"For example, if it was found that in responding to the stimulus word to win, 700 persons gave to lose (full value), and 72 gave to fail (half value), the total number of responses was counted as 736."
Discussion¶
Related Claims¶
- Difficulty orderings from the 990-response standardization correlate .895 with the earlier 100-subject King and Gold standardization — related
- Percentile-based and percentage-of-failure evaluations of stimulus-word difficulty agree almost perfectly (rank r = .996) — related
- A graded hard-opposites list of twenty-five words was selected where accuracy of response was below 69% — related
- Standardized easy opposites lists can be built from words answered correctly by ninety percent or more of subjects — related
Page metadata
| Field | Value |
|---|---|
type |
claim |
id |
opposites-word-difficulty-range-suave-96-percent |
title |
Response frequencies to stimulus words vary widely, with easy words answered correctly by most subjects and hard words such as suave missed by 96% |
description |
Response frequencies to stimulus words vary widely, with easy words answered correctly by most subjects and hard words such as suave missed by 96% |
status |
review |
evidence_strength |
moderate |
newest_evidence |
1918 |
generated |
by process:wiki-ingest on 2026-10-25 |
trust |
unverified — no one has confirmed this page's content |
sources |
2 — harry-a-greene-1918, harry-a-greene-1918-2 |
Frontmatter is the page's machine-readable record — see the Schema & Guide.