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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Theory of Mind and Reading Comprehension in Deaf and Hard-of-Hearing Signing Children
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00854 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Emil Holmer, Mikael Heimann, Mary Rudner |
| Abstract |
Theory of Mind (ToM) is related to reading comprehension in hearing children. In the present study, we investigated progression in ToM in Swedish deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) signing children who were learning to read, as well as the association of ToM with reading comprehension. Thirteen children at Swedish state primary schools for DHH children performed a Swedish Sign Language (SSL) version of the Wellman and Liu (2004) ToM scale, along with tests of reading comprehension, SSL comprehension, and working memory. Results indicated that ToM progression did not differ from that reported in previous studies, although ToM development was delayed despite age-appropriate sign language skills. Correlation analysis revealed that ToM was associated with reading comprehension and working memory, but not sign language comprehension. We propose that some factor not investigated in the present study, possibly represented by inference making constrained by working memory capacity, supports both ToM and reading comprehension and may thus explain the results observed in the present study. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 102 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Sweden | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 100 | 98% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 19 | 19% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 10% |
| Researcher | 9 | 9% |
| Professor | 7 | 7% |
| Other | 19 | 19% |
| Unknown | 25 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 32 | 31% |
| Social Sciences | 13 | 13% |
| Linguistics | 7 | 7% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 7 | 7% |
| Arts and Humanities | 6 | 6% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 26 | 25% |
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 06 July 2016.
All research outputs
#17,810,867
of 22,880,230 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#20,564
of 29,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#241,954
of 341,024 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#330
of 427 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,880,230 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,974 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 341,024 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 427 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.