↓ Skip to main content

Everyday Language Exposure Shapes Prediction of Specific Words in Listening Comprehension: A Visual World Eye-Tracking Study

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, February 2021
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (72nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (65th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
11 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
43 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
Everyday Language Exposure Shapes Prediction of Specific Words in Listening Comprehension: A Visual World Eye-Tracking Study
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, February 2021
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2021.607474
Pubmed ID
Authors

Aine Ito, Hiromu Sakai

Abstract

We investigated the effects of everyday language exposure on the prediction of orthographic and phonological forms of a highly predictable word during listening comprehension. Native Japanese speakers in Tokyo (Experiment 1) and Berlin (Experiment 2) listened to sentences that contained a predictable word and viewed four objects. The critical object represented the target word (e.g., /sakana/; fish), an orthographic competitor (e.g., /tuno/; horn), a phonological competitor (e.g., /sakura/; cherry blossom), or an unrelated word (e.g., /hon/; book). The three other objects were distractors. The Tokyo group fixated the target and the orthographic competitor over the unrelated objects before the target word was mentioned, suggesting that they pre-activated the orthographic form of the target word. The Berlin group showed a weaker bias toward the target than the Tokyo group, and they showed a tendency to fixate the orthographic competitor only when the orthographic similarity was very high. Thus, prediction effects were weaker in the Berlin group than in the Tokyo group. We found no evidence for the prediction of phonological information. The obtained group differences support probabilistic models of prediction, which regard the built-up language experience as a basis of prediction.

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 43 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 43 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 6 14%
Student > Master 5 12%
Student > Bachelor 4 9%
Researcher 3 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 7%
Other 8 19%
Unknown 14 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 13 30%
Psychology 10 23%
Neuroscience 2 5%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 2%
Arts and Humanities 1 2%
Other 2 5%
Unknown 14 33%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 6. 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 22 November 2023.
All research outputs
#6,104,598
of 24,855,923 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#8,690
of 33,527 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#144,180
of 525,831 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#330
of 960 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,855,923 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 75th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 33,527 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.0. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% 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 525,831 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 72% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 960 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 65% of its contemporaries.