↓ Skip to main content

Effects of Semantic Richness on Lexical Processing in Monolinguals and Bilinguals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
27 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
Effects of Semantic Richness on Lexical Processing in Monolinguals and Bilinguals
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00382
Pubmed ID
Authors

Vanessa Taler, Rocío López Zunini, Shanna Kousaie

Abstract

The effect of number of senses (NoS), a measure of semantic richness, was examined in monolingual English speakers (n = 17) and bilingual speakers of English and French (n = 18). Participants completed lexical decision tasks while EEG was recorded: monolinguals completed the task in English only, and bilinguals completed two lexical decision tasks, one in English and one in French. Effects of NoS were observed in both participant groups, with shorter response times and reduced N400 amplitudes to high relative to low NoS items. These effects were stronger in monolinguals than in bilinguals. Moreover, we found dissociations across languages in bilinguals, with stronger behavioral NoS effects in English and stronger event-related potential (ERP) NoS effects in French. This finding suggests that different aspects of linguistic performance may be stronger in each of a bilingual's two languages.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 27 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Italy 1 4%
Unknown 26 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 9 33%
Student > Master 5 19%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 7%
Student > Bachelor 2 7%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 4 15%
Unknown 3 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 9 33%
Linguistics 4 15%
Social Sciences 3 11%
Neuroscience 2 7%
Unspecified 2 7%
Other 3 11%
Unknown 4 15%
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 29 July 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,685
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,548
of 7,170 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#320,159
of 365,421 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#162
of 168 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,170 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 365,421 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 168 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.