↓ Skip to main content

Further evidence for the interaction of central and peripheral processes: the impact of double letters in writing English words

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

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
35 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
Further evidence for the interaction of central and peripheral processes: the impact of double letters in writing English words
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00729
Pubmed ID
Authors

Sonia Kandel, Ronald Peereman, Anna Ghimenton

Abstract

Most studies on spelling processes suppose that the activation of orthographic representations is over before we start to write. The goal of the present study was to provide evidence indicating that the orthographic representations activated during spelling production interact continuously with the motor processes during movement production. We manipulated gemination to assess the influence of the orthographic properties of words on the kinematic parameters of production. Native English-speaking participants wrote words containing double letters and control words on a digitizer [e.g., DISSIPATE (Geminate) and DISGRACE (Control)]. The word pairs shared the initial letters and differed on the presence of a doublet at the same position. The results revealed that latencies were shorter for Geminates than Controls, indicating that spelling processes were facilitated by the presence of a doublet in the word. Critically, the impact of letter doubling was also observed during production, with shorter letter durations (e.g., D, I, S) and intervals (DI, IS) for Geminates than Controls. Letter doubling therefore affected the whole process of word writing: from spelling recall to movement preparation and production. The spelling processes that were involved before movement initiation cascaded into processes that regulate movement execution. The activation spread onto peripheral processing until the production of the doublet was completely programmed (e.g., letter S).

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 35 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
France 1 3%
Unknown 34 97%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 13 37%
Researcher 5 14%
Student > Master 3 9%
Other 2 6%
Professor 2 6%
Other 3 9%
Unknown 7 20%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 16 46%
Linguistics 4 11%
Social Sciences 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 2 6%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 10 29%
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 10 October 2013.
All research outputs
#20,205,224
of 22,725,280 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#23,877
of 29,541 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#248,792
of 280,762 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#851
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,725,280 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 29,541 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. 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 280,762 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 969 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.