↓ Skip to main content

Effort Not Speed Characterizes Comprehension of Spoken Sentences by Older Adults with Mild Hearing Impairment

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
49 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
82 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
Effort Not Speed Characterizes Comprehension of Spoken Sentences by Older Adults with Mild Hearing Impairment
Published in
Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience, January 2017
DOI 10.3389/fnagi.2016.00329
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicole D. Ayasse, Amanda Lash, Arthur Wingfield

Abstract

In spite of the rapidity of everyday speech, older adults tend to keep up relatively well in day-to-day listening. In laboratory settings older adults do not respond as quickly as younger adults in off-line tests of sentence comprehension, but the question is whether comprehension itself is actually slower. Two unique features of the human eye were used to address this question. First, we tracked eye-movements as 20 young adults and 20 healthy older adults listened to sentences that referred to one of four objects pictured on a computer screen. Although the older adults took longer to indicate the referenced object with a cursor-pointing response, their gaze moved to the correct object as rapidly as that of the younger adults. Second, we concurrently measured dilation of the pupil of the eye as a physiological index of effort. This measure revealed that although poorer hearing acuity did not slow processing, success came at the cost of greater processing effort.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 82 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 4%
Unknown 79 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 23%
Researcher 13 16%
Student > Master 12 15%
Student > Bachelor 6 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 5%
Other 9 11%
Unknown 19 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 18 22%
Medicine and Dentistry 7 9%
Engineering 7 9%
Neuroscience 7 9%
Linguistics 6 7%
Other 18 22%
Unknown 19 23%
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 18 January 2017.
All research outputs
#17,837,681
of 22,914,829 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#3,821
of 4,825 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#294,114
of 421,268 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Aging Neuroscience
#78
of 94 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,914,829 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,825 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 421,268 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 26th percentile – i.e., 26% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 94 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.