↓ Skip to main content

Dissociating crossmodal and verbal demands in paired associate learning (PAL): What drives the PAL–reading relationship?

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, February 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
65 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 Mendeley
citeulike
3 CiteULike
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
Dissociating crossmodal and verbal demands in paired associate learning (PAL): What drives the PAL–reading relationship?
Published in
Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, February 2013
DOI 10.1016/j.jecp.2012.11.012
Pubmed ID
Authors

Robin A. Litt, Peter F. de Jong, Elsje van Bergen, Kate Nation

Abstract

Recent research suggests that visual-verbal paired associate learning (PAL) may tap a crossmodal associative learning mechanism that plays a distinct role in reading development. However, evidence from children with dyslexia indicates that deficits in visual-verbal PAL are strongly linked to the verbal demands of the task. The primary aim of this study was to disassociate the role of modality and verbal demand in driving the PAL-reading relationship. To do so, we compared performance across four PAL mapping conditions: visual-verbal, verbal-verbal, visual-visual and verbal-visual. We reasoned that if crossmodal mapping demand accounts for the PAL-reading relationship, both visual-verbal PAL and verbal-visual PAL should exhibit significant relationships with reading ability. The results were incompatible with the crossmodal hypothesis. Only tasks requiring verbal output (visual-verbal PAL and verbal-verbal PAL) significantly correlated with reading ability. In addition, visual-verbal PAL and verbal-verbal PAL were well represented by a latent "verbal output PAL" factor. Structural equation modeling showed that this factor fully accounted for the PAL-reading relationship; visual-verbal PAL did not add anything to the prediction of reading above and beyond this latent factor. The results are interpreted according to an alternative verbal account of the PAL-reading relationship.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Netherlands 1 1%
Denmark 1 1%
Unknown 76 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 18%
Researcher 9 11%
Student > Master 9 11%
Professor 7 9%
Student > Postgraduate 6 7%
Other 28 34%
Unknown 8 10%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 44 54%
Social Sciences 9 11%
Neuroscience 5 6%
Linguistics 3 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 4%
Other 6 7%
Unknown 12 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 15 February 2013.
All research outputs
#14,278,028
of 25,374,647 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
#910
of 1,743 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#165,155
of 295,680 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Child Psychology
#8
of 24 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,743 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 11.6. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 295,680 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 24 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.