↓ Skip to main content

Using event-related potentials to measure phrase boundary perception in English

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Neuroscience, November 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (52nd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
46 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.
Article details
Title
Using event-related potentials to measure phrase boundary perception in English
Published in
BMC Neuroscience, November 2014
DOI 10.1186/s12868-014-0129-z
Pubmed ID
Authors
Abstract

BackgroundThe closure positive shift (CPS) event related potential (ERP) is commonly used as a neural measure of phrase boundary perception in speech. The present study investigated whether the CPS was elicited by acoustic cues at phrase boundaries in English. ERPs were recorded when participants listened passively to sentences with either early or late phrase boundaries.ResultsThe closure positive shift (CPS) ERP was elicited at both early and late phrase boundaries. However, the latency, amplitude, and scalp distribution of these passive CPS ERPs in English sentences differed to active CPS ERPs measured in non-English sentences in previous studies.ConclusionsThese results show that acoustic cues at the phrase boundaries in English are sufficient to elicit the CPS, and suggest that different processes might be involved in the generation of the CPS in active and passive conditions.

Login to access the Attention Digest and the Sentiment Analysis related to this output.

Timeline Attention over time Attention Score history
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
Activity
Login to access the full charts related to this output.
X Demographics

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.
Mendeley demographics

Mendeley demographics

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Login to view Mendeley reader trends over time.

Geographical breakdown

Geographical breakdown
Country Count As %
Brazil 2 4%
Colombia 1 2%
Unknown 43 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status
Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 13 28%
Student > Ph. D. Student 8 17%
Student > Master 5 11%
Other 4 9%
Professor 4 9%
Other 7 15%
Unknown 5 11%
Readers by discipline
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 12 26%
Psychology 10 22%
Arts and Humanities 3 7%
Neuroscience 3 7%
Engineering 3 7%
Other 4 9%
Unknown 11 24%
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 03 December 2014.
All research outputs
#23,058,975
of 32,471,789 outputs
Outputs from BMC Neuroscience
#949
of 1,485 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#276,753
of 410,398 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Neuroscience
#8
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 32,471,789 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,485 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.7. This one is in the 28th percentile – i.e., 28% 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 410,398 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 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 52% of its contemporaries.