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.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
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 |
Order short-term memory is not impaired in dyslexia and does not affect orthographic learning
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fnhum.2014.00732 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Eva Staels, Wim Van den Broeck |
| Abstract |
This article reports two studies that investigate short-term memory (STM) deficits in dyslexic children and explores the relationship between STM and reading acquisition. In the first experiment, 36 dyslexic children and 61 control children performed an item STM task and a serial order STM task. The results of this experiment show that dyslexic children do not suffer from a specific serial order STM deficit. In addition, the results demonstrate that phonological processing skills are as closely related to both item STM and serial order STM. However, non-verbal intelligence was more strongly involved in serial order STM than in item STM. In the second experiment, the same two STM tasks were administered and reading acquisition was assessed by measuring orthographic learning in a group of 188 children. The results of this study show that orthographic learning is exclusively related to item STM and not to order STM. It is concluded that serial order STM is not the right place to look for a causal explanation of reading disability, nor for differences in word reading acquisition. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 1 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 79 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Spain | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 78 | 99% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 19 | 24% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 16 | 20% |
| Researcher | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 8% |
| Professor | 6 | 8% |
| Other | 17 | 22% |
| Unknown | 9 | 11% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 44 | 56% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 8% |
| Linguistics | 5 | 6% |
| Arts and Humanities | 4 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 5% |
| Other | 6 | 8% |
| Unknown | 10 | 13% |
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 22 October 2014.
All research outputs
#18,378,085
of 22,763,032 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#6,058
of 7,139 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#179,737
of 251,974 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#218
of 255 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,763,032 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,139 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.5. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% 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 251,974 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 255 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.