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 |
Parents Accidentally Substitute Similar Sounding Sibling Names More Often than Dissimilar Names
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
PLOS ONE, December 2013
|
| DOI | 10.1371/journal.pone.0084444 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Zenzi M. Griffin, Thomas Wangerman |
| Abstract |
When parents select similar sounding names for their children, do they set themselves up for more speech errors in the future? Questionnaire data from 334 respondents suggest that they do. Respondents whose names shared initial or final sounds with a sibling's reported that their parents accidentally called them by the sibling's name more often than those without such name overlap. Having a sibling of the same gender, similar appearance, or similar age was also associated with more frequent name substitutions. Almost all other name substitutions by parents involved other family members and over 5% of respondents reported a parent substituting the name of a pet, which suggests a strong role for social and situational cues in retrieving personal names for direct address. To the extent that retrieval cues are shared with other people or animals, other names become available and may substitute for the intended name, particularly when names sound similar. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 88 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 31 | 35% |
| Canada | 7 | 8% |
| United Kingdom | 5 | 6% |
| Australia | 2 | 2% |
| Sweden | 1 | 1% |
| Turkey | 1 | 1% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 1% |
| Belgium | 1 | 1% |
| Croatia | 1 | 1% |
| Other | 5 | 6% |
| Unknown | 33 | 38% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 63 | 72% |
| Scientists | 16 | 18% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 5 | 6% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 4 | 5% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 18 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Luxembourg | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 17 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Researcher | 5 | 28% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 3 | 17% |
| Lecturer | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 6% |
| Other | 4 | 22% |
| Unknown | 1 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 7 | 39% |
| Linguistics | 3 | 17% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 2 | 11% |
| Computer Science | 2 | 11% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 11% |
| Other | 2 | 11% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 178. 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 March 2022.
All research outputs
#231,374
of 25,850,671 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#3,370
of 225,402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#2,038
of 321,242 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#91
of 5,451 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,850,671 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 225,402 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.9. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% 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 321,242 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,451 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 98% of its contemporaries.