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 |
The semantic richness of abstract concepts
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, January 2012
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2012.00315 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Gabriel Recchia, Michael N. Jones |
| Abstract |
We contrasted the predictive power of three measures of semantic richness-number of features (NFs), contextual dispersion (CD), and a novel measure of number of semantic neighbors (NSN)-for a large set of concrete and abstract concepts on lexical decision and naming tasks. NSN (but not NF) facilitated processing for abstract concepts, while NF (but not NSN) facilitated processing for the most concrete concepts, consistent with claims that linguistic information is more relevant for abstract concepts in early processing. Additionally, converging evidence from two datasets suggests that when NSN and CD are controlled for, the features that most facilitate processing are those associated with a concept's physical characteristics and real-world contexts. These results suggest that rich linguistic contexts (many semantic neighbors) facilitate early activation of abstract concepts, whereas concrete concepts benefit more from rich physical contexts (many associated objects and locations). |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 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 | 2 | 50% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 25% |
| Spain | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 3 | 75% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 135 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 5 | 4% |
| Germany | 2 | 1% |
| Peru | 1 | <1% |
| Canada | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 126 | 93% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 24% |
| Researcher | 24 | 18% |
| Professor | 10 | 7% |
| Student > Master | 10 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 9 | 7% |
| Other | 32 | 24% |
| Unknown | 17 | 13% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 53 | 39% |
| Linguistics | 16 | 12% |
| Neuroscience | 13 | 10% |
| Computer Science | 7 | 5% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Other | 15 | 11% |
| Unknown | 24 | 18% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 25. 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 July 2018.
All research outputs
#1,308,940
of 22,687,320 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#637
of 7,119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#9,281
of 244,125 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#38
of 294 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,687,320 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 94th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,119 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 91% 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 244,125 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 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 294 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.