A Question on AntConc Collocate Function: Result Count Increases with Higher Min. Freq

3 views
Skip to first unread message

Mandy Wang

unread,
Feb 5, 2026, 11:52:01 PM (7 hours ago) Feb 5
to AntConc-Discussion

Hi Anthony! I am using the Collocates tool in AntConc and have encountered a phenomenon that I would like to understand better.

When I searched for collocates of the node word "windows" with a window span of 5L to 5R, set the Min. Freq to 1, and sorted by Likelihood, the result returned 11​ collocates.

However, when I changed only the Min. Freq setting to 2​ (keeping all other settings identical) and reran the search, the result surprisingly returned 16​ collocates.

I have checked the KWIC concordance for some of the "new" collocates that appeared in the second search but were absent from the first. They indeed co-occurred with "windows" twice within the defined span, meeting the Min. Freq=2 criterion.

I am curious about why increasing the frequency threshold led to more results being displayed. Thank you very much for your time in helping with this issue.

Best, Mandy

minfreq1.pngminfreq2.png

Laurence Anthony

unread,
Feb 5, 2026, 11:54:35 PM (7 hours ago) Feb 5
to ant...@googlegroups.com
Hi Mandy,
Can you send me your corpus (at my email address below), so I can replicate your results?
Laurence.

###############################################################
Laurence ANTHONY, Ph.D.
Professor of Applied Linguistics
Faculty of Science and Engineering
Waseda University
3-4-1 Okubo, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-8555, Japan
E-mail: antho...@gmail.com
WWW: http://www.laurenceanthony.net/
###############################################################


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "AntConc-Discussion" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to antconc+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/antconc/3a15e14a-09fa-452b-b938-983706d0002dn%40googlegroups.com.

Laurence Anthony

unread,
12:17 AM (6 hours ago) 12:17 AM
to ant...@googlegroups.com
Hi Mandy,
Thanks for sending the files. The effect you're seeing is because of the Bonferroni correction to the p-value. More hits will cause a greater impact of the correction. If you use a non-variable p-value threshold (e.g. p<0.05) the results should align with your expectations.
I hope that helps!
Laurence.

###############################################################
Laurence ANTHONY, Ph.D.
Professor of Applied Linguistics
Faculty of Science and Engineering
Waseda University
3-4-1 Okubo, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 169-8555, Japan
E-mail: antho...@gmail.com
WWW: http://www.laurenceanthony.net/
###############################################################

Laurence Anthony

unread,
12:20 AM (6 hours ago) 12:20 AM
to ant...@googlegroups.com
Just following on from my reply above, it perhaps makes more sense to apply the min-freq threshold to the results *after* the p-value cut-off is applied. Let me think more about this. 
Laurence.
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages