↓ Skip to main content

The Dorsal Rather than Ventral Pathway Better Reflects Individual Syntactic Abilities in Second Language

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
7 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 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
The Dorsal Rather than Ventral Pathway Better Reflects Individual Syntactic Abilities in Second Language
Published in
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience, June 2016
DOI 10.3389/fnhum.2016.00295
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kayako Yamamoto, Kuniyoshi L. Sakai

Abstract

The left inferior frontal gyrus (IFG) has been reported to be critically involved in syntactic processing, not only in first language (L1), but in second language (L2). Indeed, the leftward lateralization of the IFG has been shown to be correlated with the performance of a syntactic task in L2. Given that posterior language-related regions are systematically connected with the left IFG, the next question is which of the dorsal and ventral pathways is more critical to the individual syntactic abilities in L2. Here we used diffusion magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and tractography with newly developed semi-automatic methods of defining seeds and selecting regions of interest (ROIs). We calculated mean thickness and fractional anisotropy (FA) in each ROI for the arcuate fasciculus (Arcuate) of the dorsal pathway, as well as for the inferior fronto-occipital fasciculus (IFOF) of the ventral pathway. In Experiment I, we performed partial correlation analyses between FA and the accuracy of the syntactic task, removing the effects of the accuracy of a spelling task, gender, and handedness. Among the two pathways in each hemisphere, only FA of the left Arcuate was significantly correlated with individual accuracy of the syntactic task. In Experiment II, we recruited monozygotic twins and examined to what extent their L2 abilities and their structural properties were similar. Within twin pairs, the highest significant correlation was observed for reaction times of the spelling task, while the correlation for the accuracy of the syntactic task was marginal; these two correlation coefficients were significantly different. Moreover, the thickness of the left Arcuate was highly correlated within pairs, while its FA, as well as the thickness/FA in the ventral pathways, was not significantly correlated. The correlation coefficient for the thickness of the left Arcuate was significantly larger than that of the left IFOF. These results suggest that the thickness of the left Arcuate is more associated with the shared genetic/environmental factors, whereas both of mutually correlated FA in the left Arcuate and individual syntactic abilities in L2 may be less prone to these shared factors.

Timeline

Login to access the full chart related to this output.

If you don’t have an account, click here to discover Explorer

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 3%
Italy 1 3%
Unknown 27 93%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Doctoral Student 6 21%
Researcher 6 21%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 3 10%
Student > Master 3 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 7%
Other 4 14%
Unknown 5 17%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Linguistics 9 31%
Neuroscience 7 24%
Psychology 4 14%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 1 3%
Unknown 6 21%
Attention Score in Context

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 14 June 2016.
All research outputs
#17,808,979
of 22,877,793 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#5,720
of 7,169 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#252,559
of 352,714 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
#166
of 192 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,877,793 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 7,169 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.6. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% 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 352,714 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 192 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.