↓ Skip to main content

Early development of turn-taking in vocal interaction between mothers and infants

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (69th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
149 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
140 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
Early development of turn-taking in vocal interaction between mothers and infants
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01167
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maya Gratier, Emmanuel Devouche, Bahia Guellai, Rubia Infanti, Ebru Yilmaz, Erika Parlato-Oliveira

Abstract

Infants are known to engage in conversation-like exchanges from the end of the second month after birth. These 'protoconversations' involve both turn-taking and overlapping vocalization. Previous research has shown that the temporal organization of adult-infant turn-taking sequences is similar to that of adult verbal conversation. It has also been shown that young infants adjust the quality of their vocalization in response to the quality and timing of adult vocalization. We present new evidence of turn-taking interaction in infants aged between 8 and 21 weeks based on the analysis of 176 samples of naturalistic face-to-face interactions from 51 dyads. We found high levels of latched turns as well as frequent initiation of turn-taking by infants at these ages. Our data do not support the hypothesis that turn-taking ability increases with age between 2 and 5 months but do suggest that infants are active participants in turn-taking from the earliest age and that mothers adjust turn-taking formats to infants.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 140 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 <1%
Denmark 1 <1%
Unknown 138 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 19%
Student > Master 20 14%
Researcher 13 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 13 9%
Student > Bachelor 13 9%
Other 18 13%
Unknown 36 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 52 37%
Linguistics 10 7%
Social Sciences 6 4%
Nursing and Health Professions 5 4%
Neuroscience 5 4%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 41 29%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 April 2022.
All research outputs
#6,268,149
of 23,530,272 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,950
of 31,362 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#71,526
of 268,345 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#171
of 563 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,530,272 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,362 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 71% 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 268,345 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 563 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 69% of its contemporaries.