↓ Skip to main content

Language Universals Engage Broca's Area

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

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (97th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (95th percentile)

Mentioned by

news
3 news outlets
blogs
3 blogs
twitter
14 X users
googleplus
12 Google+ users

Citations

dimensions_citation
18 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
59 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
Language Universals Engage Broca's Area
Published in
PLOS ONE, April 2014
DOI 10.1371/journal.pone.0095155
Pubmed ID
Authors

Iris Berent, Hong Pan, Xu Zhao, Jane Epstein, Monica L. Bennett, Vibhas Deshpande, Ravi Teja Seethamraju, Emily Stern

Abstract

It is well known that natural languages share certain aspects of their design. For example, across languages, syllables like blif are preferred to lbif. But whether language universals are myths or mentally active constraints-linguistic or otherwise-remains controversial. To address this question, we used fMRI to investigate brain response to four syllable types, arrayed on their linguistic well-formedness (e.g., blif≻bnif≻bdif≻lbif, where ≻ indicates preference). Results showed that syllable structure monotonically modulated hemodynamic response in Broca's area, and its pattern mirrored participants' behavioral preferences. In contrast, ill-formed syllables did not systematically tax sensorimotor regions-while such syllables engaged primary auditory cortex, they tended to deactivate (rather than engage) articulatory motor regions. The convergence between the cross-linguistic preferences and English participants' hemodynamic and behavioral responses is remarkable given that most of these syllables are unattested in their language. We conclude that human brains encode broad restrictions on syllable structure.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 14 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 59 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 3%
Indonesia 1 2%
France 1 2%
Switzerland 1 2%
Unknown 54 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 10 17%
Professor 8 14%
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 12%
Student > Master 7 12%
Student > Bachelor 6 10%
Other 14 24%
Unknown 7 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 27%
Linguistics 12 20%
Neuroscience 5 8%
Engineering 4 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Other 9 15%
Unknown 10 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 61. 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 27 September 2014.
All research outputs
#661,709
of 24,585,148 outputs
Outputs from PLOS ONE
#9,014
of 212,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#6,143
of 230,970 outputs
Outputs of similar age from PLOS ONE
#238
of 4,988 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,585,148 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 212,329 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 15.6. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 95% 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 230,970 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 97% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 4,988 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 95% of its contemporaries.