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 |
Is More Always Better for Verbs? Semantic Richness Effects and Verb Meaning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, May 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.00798 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
David M Sidhu, Alison Heard, Penny M Pexman |
| Abstract |
We examined how several semantic richness variables contribute to verb meaning, across a number of tasks. Because verbs can vary in tense, and the manner in which tense is coded (i.e., regularity), we also examined how these factors moderated the effects of semantic richness. In Experiment 1 we found that age of acquisition (AoA), valence, arousal and embodiment predicted faster response times in LDT. In Experiment 2 we examined a particular semantic richness variable, verb embodiment, and found that it was moderated by tense and regularity. In Experiment 3a we found that AoA predicted faster response times in verb reading. Finally, in Experiment 3b, semantic diversity predicted response times in a past tense generation task, either facilitating or inhibiting responses for regular or irregular verbs, respectively. These results demonstrate that semantic richness variables contribute to verb meaning even when verbs are presented in isolation, and that these effects depend on several factors unique to verbs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 1 | 33% |
| Canada | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 1 | 33% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 2 | 67% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Brazil | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 36 | 97% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 9 | 24% |
| Student > Master | 4 | 11% |
| Researcher | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 3 | 8% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 8% |
| Other | 6 | 16% |
| Unknown | 9 | 24% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 14 | 38% |
| Linguistics | 5 | 14% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 8% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 1 | 3% |
| Unknown | 11 | 30% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 14 July 2016.
All research outputs
#13,394,314
of 22,869,263 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#13,024
of 29,930 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#174,798
of 338,907 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#241
of 437 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,869,263 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,930 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 55% 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 338,907 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 47th percentile – i.e., 47% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 437 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.