↓ Skip to main content

How do L2 learners and L1 writers differ in their reliance on working memory during the formulation subprocess?

Overview of attention for article published in Reading and Writing, February 2019
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
26 Mendeley
Title
How do L2 learners and L1 writers differ in their reliance on working memory during the formulation subprocess?
Published in
Reading and Writing, February 2019
DOI 10.1007/s11145-019-09941-y
Authors

Cecilia Gunnarsson-Largy, Nathalie Dherbey, Pierre Largy

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 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 26 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 26 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 3 12%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 8%
Student > Bachelor 2 8%
Lecturer 1 4%
Professor 1 4%
Other 1 4%
Unknown 16 62%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 6 23%
Social Sciences 2 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 1 4%
Neuroscience 1 4%
Unknown 16 62%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 09 April 2019.
All research outputs
#16,223,992
of 23,911,072 outputs
Outputs from Reading and Writing
#591
of 797 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#224,928
of 356,380 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Reading and Writing
#10
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,911,072 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 797 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 6.5. This one is in the 18th percentile – i.e., 18% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 356,380 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.