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 |
Processing Load Imposed by Line Breaks in English Temporal Wh-Questions
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01465 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Masako Hirotani, J. Michael Terry, Norihiro Sadato |
| Abstract |
Prosody plays an important role in online sentence processing both explicitly and implicitly. It has been shown that prosodically packaging together parts of a sentence that are interpreted together facilitates processing of the sentence. This applies not only to explicit prosody but also implicit prosody. The present work hypothesizes that a line break in a written text induces an implicit prosodic break, which, in turn, should result in a processing bias for interpreting English wh-questions. Two experiments-one self-paced reading study and one questionnaire study-are reported. Both supported the "line break" hypothesis mentioned above. The results of the self-paced reading experiment showed that unambiguous wh-questions were read faster when the location of line breaks (or frame breaks) matched the scope of a wh-phrase (main or embedded clause) than when they did not. The questionnaire tested sentences with an ambiguous wh-phrase, one that could attach either to the main or the embedded clause. These sentences were interpreted as attaching to the main clause more often than to the embedded clause when a line break appeared after the main verb, but not when it appeared after the embedded verb. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 22 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 22 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 3 | 14% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 3 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 2 | 9% |
| Professor | 2 | 9% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 2 | 9% |
| Other | 4 | 18% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Linguistics | 5 | 23% |
| Psychology | 4 | 18% |
| Neuroscience | 3 | 14% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 1 | 5% |
| Unspecified | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 2 | 9% |
| Unknown | 6 | 27% |
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 30 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,397,576
of 22,947,506 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,292
of 30,094 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#277,652
of 320,689 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#402
of 458 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,947,506 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 30,094 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 320,689 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 458 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.