↓ Skip to main content

A Cognitively Grounded Measure of Pronunciation Distance

Overview of attention for article published in PLOS ONE, January 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

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.
Title
A Cognitively Grounded Measure of Pronunciation Distance
Published in
PLOS ONE, January 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0075734
Pubmed ID
Authors

Martijn Wieling, John Nerbonne, Jelke Bloem, Charlotte Gooskens, Wilbert Heeringa, R. Harald Baayen

Abstract

In this study we develop pronunciation distances based on naive discriminative learning (NDL). Measures of pronunciation distance are used in several subfields of linguistics, including psycholinguistics, dialectology and typology. In contrast to the commonly used Levenshtein algorithm, NDL is grounded in cognitive theory of competitive reinforcement learning and is able to generate asymmetrical pronunciation distances. In a first study, we validated the NDL-based pronunciation distances by comparing them to a large set of native-likeness ratings given by native American English speakers when presented with accented English speech. In a second study, the NDL-based pronunciation distances were validated on the basis of perceptual dialect distances of Norwegian speakers. Results indicated that the NDL-based pronunciation distances matched perceptual distances reasonably well with correlations ranging between 0.7 and 0.8. While the correlations were comparable to those obtained using the Levenshtein distance, the NDL-based approach is more flexible as it is also able to incorporate acoustic information other than sound segments.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 46 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Belgium 2 4%
Unknown 44 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 22%
Researcher 7 15%
Student > Master 6 13%
Professor > Associate Professor 4 9%
Student > Bachelor 3 7%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 7 15%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 18 39%
Arts and Humanities 3 7%
Psychology 3 7%
Social Sciences 3 7%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 9 20%
Unknown 8 17%
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 29 April 2015.
All research outputs
#13,243,031
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#105,738
of 199,621 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#159,303
of 307,708 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#2,596
of 5,370 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 199,621 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.3. This one is in the 45th percentile – i.e., 45% 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 307,708 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 5,370 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 50% of its contemporaries.