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.
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Individual Differences in the Strength of Taxonomic Versus Thematic Relations
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Journal of Experimental Psychology. General, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.1037/a0026451 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Daniel Mirman, Kristen M. Graziano |
| Abstract |
Knowledge about word and object meanings can be organized taxonomically (fruits, mammals, etc.) on the basis of shared features or thematically (eating breakfast, taking a dog for a walk, etc.) on the basis of participation in events or scenarios. An eye-tracking study showed that both kinds of knowledge are activated during comprehension of a single spoken word, even when the listener is not required to perform any active task. The results further revealed that an individual's relative activation of taxonomic relations compared to thematic relations predicts that individual's tendency to favor taxonomic over thematic relations when asked to choose between them in a similarity judgment task. These results indicate that individuals differ in the relative strengths of their taxonomic and thematic semantic knowledge and suggest that meaning information is organized in 2 parallel, complementary semantic systems. |
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 Kingdom | 2 | 2% |
| Russia | 2 | 2% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Switzerland | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 96 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 26 | 25% |
| Researcher | 19 | 19% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 12% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 10% |
| Lecturer > Senior Lecturer | 5 | 5% |
| Other | 14 | 14% |
| Unknown | 16 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 50 | 49% |
| Neuroscience | 6 | 6% |
| Linguistics | 5 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 4 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 11 | 11% |
| Unknown | 22 | 22% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 12 November 2012.
All research outputs
#6,563,577
of 25,604,262 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
#993
of 2,606 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#53,248
of 251,039 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Experimental Psychology. General
#29
of 56 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,604,262 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 74th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,606 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 22.4. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% 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 251,039 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 56 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 48th percentile – i.e., 48% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.