↓ Skip to main content

Cross-situational word learning is both implicit and strategic

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

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
17 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
Cross-situational word learning is both implicit and strategic
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, June 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00588
Pubmed ID
Authors

George Kachergis, Chen Yu, Richard M. Shiffrin

Abstract

For decades, implicit learning researchers have examined a variety of cognitive tasks in which people seem to automatically extract structure from the environment. Similarly, recent statistical learning studies have shown that people can learn word-object mappings from the repeated co-occurrence of words and objects in individually ambiguous situations. In light of this, the goal of the present paper is to investigate whether adult cross-situational learners require an explicit effort to learn word-object mappings, or if it may take place incidentally, only requiring attention to the stimuli. In two implicit learning experiments with incidental tasks directing participants' attention to different aspects of the stimuli, we found evidence of learning, suggesting that cross-situational learning mechanisms can operate incidentally, without explicit effort. However, performance was superior under explicit study instructions, indicating that strategic processes also play a role. Moreover, performance under instruction to learn word meanings did not differ from performance at counting co-occurrences, which may indicate these tasks engage similar strategies.

X Demographics

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.
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%
Japan 1 2%
Unknown 48 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 18 35%
Researcher 7 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 13%
Student > Master 6 12%
Student > Bachelor 3 6%
Other 8 15%
Unknown 3 6%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 29 56%
Linguistics 6 12%
Neuroscience 4 8%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 4%
Computer Science 2 4%
Other 6 12%
Unknown 3 6%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 13 June 2014.
All research outputs
#15,251,202
of 22,757,090 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#18,260
of 29,671 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,883
of 228,650 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#283
of 385 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,757,090 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,671 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 37th percentile – i.e., 37% 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 228,650 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 385 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.