↓ Skip to main content

New Levels of Language Processing Complexity and Organization Revealed by Granger Causation

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (77th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (67th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
9 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
52 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
New Levels of Language Processing Complexity and Organization Revealed by Granger Causation
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2012
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00506
Pubmed ID
Authors

David W. Gow, David N. Caplan

Abstract

Granger causation analysis of high spatiotemporal resolution reconstructions of brain activation offers a new window on the dynamic interactions between brain areas that support language processing. Premised on the observation that causes both precede and uniquely predict their effects, this approach provides an intuitive, model-free means of identifying directed causal interactions in the brain. It requires the analysis of all non-redundant potentially interacting signals, and has shown that even "early" processes such as speech perception involve interactions of many areas in a strikingly large network that extends well beyond traditional left hemisphere perisylvian cortex that play out over hundreds of milliseconds. In this paper we describe this technique and review several general findings that reframe the way we think about language processing and brain function in general. These include the extent and complexity of language processing networks, the central role of interactive processing dynamics, the role of processing hubs where the input from many distinct brain regions are integrated, and the degree to which task requirements and stimulus properties influence processing dynamics and inform our understanding of "language-specific" localized processes.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 52 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 6%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 48 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 14 27%
Researcher 6 12%
Student > Master 5 10%
Professor 5 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 8%
Other 12 23%
Unknown 6 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Neuroscience 13 25%
Psychology 11 21%
Engineering 5 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 5 10%
Computer Science 4 8%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 6 12%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 11 January 2013.
All research outputs
#6,328,491
of 23,957,596 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,957
of 31,938 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#55,826
of 249,668 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#156
of 482 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,957,596 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,938 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.7. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 249,668 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 482 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.