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.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Iconic gestures prime words: comparison of priming effects when gestures are presented alone and when they are accompanying speech
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00779 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Wing-Chee So, Alvan Low Yi-Feng, De-Fu Yap, Eugene Kheng, Ju-Min Melvin Yap |
| Abstract |
Previous studies have shown that iconic gestures presented in an isolated manner prime visually presented semantically related words. Since gestures and speech are almost always produced together, this study examined whether iconic gestures accompanying speech would prime words and compared the priming effect of iconic gestures with speech to that of iconic gestures presented alone. Adult participants (N = 180) were randomly assigned to one of three conditions in a lexical decision task: Gestures-Only (the primes were iconic gestures presented alone); Speech-Only (the primes were auditory tokens conveying the same meaning as the iconic gestures); Gestures-Accompanying-Speech (the primes were the simultaneous coupling of iconic gestures and their corresponding auditory tokens). Our findings revealed significant priming effects in all three conditions. However, the priming effect in the Gestures-Accompanying-Speech condition was comparable to that in the Speech-Only condition and was significantly weaker than that in the Gestures-Only condition, suggesting that the facilitatory effect of iconic gestures accompanying speech may be constrained by the level of language processing required in the lexical decision task where linguistic processing of words forms is more dominant than semantic processing. Hence, the priming effect afforded by the co-speech iconic gestures was weakened. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 2 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 5% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 5% |
| United States | 1 | 5% |
| Canada | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 17 | 81% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 38% |
| Researcher | 4 | 19% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 2 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Master | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 2 | 10% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 10 | 48% |
| Linguistics | 7 | 33% |
| Social Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 1 | 5% |
| Engineering | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 1 | 5% |
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 02 November 2013.
All research outputs
#15,284,663
of 22,729,647 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,517
of 29,546 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#181,567
of 280,769 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#721
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,729,647 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,546 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 31st percentile – i.e., 31% 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 280,769 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 25th percentile – i.e., 25% 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 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.