↓ Skip to main content

Event-Related Brain Potential Investigation of Preparation for Speech Production in Late Bilinguals

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

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

Mentioned by

wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
56 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
Event-Related Brain Potential Investigation of Preparation for Speech Production in Late Bilinguals
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00114
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yan Jing Wu, Guillaume Thierry

Abstract

It has been debated how bilinguals select the intended language and prevent interference from the unintended language when speaking. Here, we studied the nature of the mental representations accessed by late fluent bilinguals during a rhyming judgment task relying on covert speech production. We recorded event-related brain potentials in Chinese-English bilinguals and monolingual speakers of English while they indicated whether the names of pictures presented on a screen rhymed.  Whether bilingual participants focussed on rhyming selectively in English or Chinese, we found a significant priming effect of language-specific sound repetition. Surprisingly, however, sound repetitions in Chinese elicited significant priming effects even when the rhyming task was performed in English. This cross-language priming effect was delayed by ∼200  ms as compared to the within-language effect and was asymmetric, since there was no priming effect of sound repetitions in English when participants were asked to make rhyming judgments in Chinese. These results demonstrate that second language production hinders, but does not seal off, activation of the first language, whereas native language production appears immune to competition from the second language.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 56 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 4%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Italy 1 2%
China 1 2%
Belgium 1 2%
Unknown 50 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 19 34%
Student > Master 8 14%
Student > Bachelor 4 7%
Researcher 4 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 5%
Other 10 18%
Unknown 8 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 21 38%
Linguistics 10 18%
Social Sciences 3 5%
Neuroscience 3 5%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Other 7 13%
Unknown 10 18%
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 18 April 2017.
All research outputs
#7,453,350
of 22,786,087 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,894
of 29,702 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#54,383
of 180,647 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#127
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,786,087 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,702 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 62% 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 180,647 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.