↓ Skip to main content

Assessing understanding of relative clauses: a comparison of multiple-choice comprehension versus sentence repetition*

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Child Language, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#38 of 625)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
34 X users
facebook
2 Facebook pages

Citations

dimensions_citation
33 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
80 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Assessing understanding of relative clauses: a comparison of multiple-choice comprehension versus sentence repetition*
Published in
Journal of Child Language, January 2017
DOI 10.1017/s0305000916000635
Pubmed ID
Authors

PAULINE FRIZELLE, CLODAGH O'NEILL, DOROTHY V. M. BISHOP

Abstract

Although sentence repetition is considered a reliable measure of children's grammatical knowledge, few studies have directly compared children's sentence repetition performance with their understanding of grammatical structures. The current study aimed to compare children's performance on these two assessment measures, using a multiple-choice picture-matching sentence comprehension task and a sentence repetition task. Thirty-three typically developing children completed both assessments, which included relative clauses representing a range of syntactic roles. Results revealed a similar order of difficulty of constructions on both measures but little agreement between them when evaluating individual differences. Interestingly, repetition was the easier of the two measures, with children showing the ability to repeat sentences they did not understand. This discrepancy is primarily attributed to the additional processing load resulting from the design of multiple-choice comprehension tasks, and highlights the fact that these assessments are invoking skills beyond those of linguistic competence.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 34 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 80 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 1 1%
Unknown 79 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 16 20%
Student > Master 11 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 8 10%
Researcher 6 8%
Student > Bachelor 3 4%
Other 10 13%
Unknown 26 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 18 23%
Psychology 16 20%
Neuroscience 6 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 4%
Sports and Recreations 2 3%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 26 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 16 August 2020.
All research outputs
#1,650,111
of 24,904,819 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Child Language
#38
of 625 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#34,336
of 429,525 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Child Language
#1
of 8 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,904,819 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 625 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 429,525 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 8 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them