↓ Skip to main content

How robust is the language architecture? The case of mood

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (56th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
5 X users
googleplus
1 Google+ user

Citations

dimensions_citation
53 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
100 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
How robust is the language architecture? The case of mood
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00505
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jos J. A. Van Berkum, Dieuwke De Goede, Petra M. Van Alphen, Emma R. Mulder, José H. Kerstholt

Abstract

In neurocognitive research on language, the processing principles of the system at hand are usually assumed to be relatively invariant. However, research on attention, memory, decision-making, and social judgment has shown that mood can substantially modulate how the brain processes information. For example, in a bad mood, people typically have a narrower focus of attention and rely less on heuristics. In the face of such pervasive mood effects elsewhere in the brain, it seems unlikely that language processing would remain untouched. In an EEG experiment, we manipulated the mood of participants just before they read texts that confirmed or disconfirmed verb-based expectations about who would be talked about next (e.g., that "David praised Linda because … " would continue about Linda, not David), or that respected or violated a syntactic agreement rule (e.g., "The boys turns"). ERPs showed that mood had little effect on syntactic parsing, but did substantially affect referential anticipation: whereas readers anticipated information about a specific person when they were in a good mood, a bad mood completely abolished such anticipation. A behavioral follow-up experiment suggested that a bad mood did not interfere with verb-based expectations per se, but prevented readers from using that information rapidly enough to predict upcoming reference on the fly, as the sentence unfolds. In all, our results reveal that background mood, a rather unobtrusive affective state, selectively changes a crucial aspect of real-time language processing. This observation fits well with other observed interactions between language processing and affect (emotions, preferences, attitudes, mood), and more generally testifies to the importance of studying "cold" cognitive functions in relation to "hot" aspects of the brain.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 5 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 100 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Colombia 1 1%
Netherlands 1 1%
France 1 1%
Spain 1 1%
United States 1 1%
Unknown 95 95%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 25 25%
Student > Bachelor 14 14%
Researcher 10 10%
Student > Master 9 9%
Professor 6 6%
Other 19 19%
Unknown 17 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 37 37%
Linguistics 18 18%
Neuroscience 7 7%
Computer Science 5 5%
Social Sciences 5 5%
Other 7 7%
Unknown 21 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. 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 19 October 2014.
All research outputs
#7,513,457
of 24,943,708 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#10,595
of 33,669 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#77,758
of 292,957 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#420
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,943,708 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 69th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,669 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.1. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% 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 292,957 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 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 56% of its contemporaries.