↓ Skip to main content

Eye movements during listening reveal spontaneous grammatical processing

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, May 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (71st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
12 X users
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
37 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
88 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
Eye movements during listening reveal spontaneous grammatical processing
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00410
Pubmed ID
Authors

Stephanie Huette, Bodo Winter, Teenie Matlock, David H. Ardell, Michael Spivey

Abstract

Recent research using eye-tracking typically relies on constrained visual contexts in particular goal-oriented contexts, viewing a small array of objects on a computer screen and performing some overt decision or identification. Eyetracking paradigms that use pictures as a measure of word or sentence comprehension are sometimes touted as ecologically invalid because pictures and explicit tasks are not always present during language comprehension. This study compared the comprehension of sentences with two different grammatical forms: the past progressive (e.g., was walking), which emphasizes the ongoing nature of actions, and the simple past (e.g., walked), which emphasizes the end-state of an action. The results showed that the distribution and timing of eye movements mirrors the underlying conceptual structure of this linguistic difference in the absence of any visual stimuli or task constraint: Fixations were shorter and saccades were more dispersed across the screen, as if thinking about more dynamic events when listening to the past progressive stories. Thus, eye movement data suggest that visual inputs or an explicit task are unnecessary to solicit analog representations of features such as movement, that could be a key perceptual component to grammatical comprehension.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 12 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 88 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United Kingdom 2 2%
United States 2 2%
Switzerland 1 1%
Unknown 83 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 26%
Student > Master 12 14%
Researcher 9 10%
Professor 9 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 7%
Other 18 20%
Unknown 11 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 26 30%
Psychology 24 27%
Arts and Humanities 5 6%
Neuroscience 4 5%
Computer Science 3 3%
Other 11 13%
Unknown 15 17%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 September 2015.
All research outputs
#3,794,040
of 23,971,024 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#6,557
of 31,954 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,701
of 229,472 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#98
of 346 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,971,024 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 84th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,954 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 done well, scoring higher than 79% 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 229,472 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 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 346 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 71% of its contemporaries.