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 |
The Influence of Expertise in Simultaneous Interpreting on Non-Verbal Executive Processes
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2011
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00309 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Carolina Yudes, Pedro Macizo, Teresa Bajo |
| Abstract |
This study aimed to explore non-verbal executive processes in simultaneous interpreters. Simultaneous interpreters, bilinguals without any training in simultaneous interpreting, and control monolinguals performed the Wisconsin card sorting task (WCST; Experiment 1) and the Simon task (Experiment 2). Performance on WCST was thought to index cognitive flexibility while Simon task performance was considered an index of inhibitory processes. Simultaneous interpreters outperformed bilinguals and monolinguals on the WCST by showing reduced number of attempts to infer the rule, few errors, and few previous-category perseverations. However, simultaneous interpreters presented Simon effects similar to those found in bilinguals and monolinguals. Together, these results suggest that experience in interpreting is associated with changes in control processes required to perform interpreting tasks. |
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.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Finland | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Netherlands | 2 | 1% |
| Belgium | 2 | 1% |
| Italy | 1 | <1% |
| Chile | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United States | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 128 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 29 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 15% |
| Researcher | 15 | 11% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 14 | 10% |
| Student > Bachelor | 10 | 7% |
| Other | 25 | 18% |
| Unknown | 22 | 16% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 47 | 35% |
| Linguistics | 39 | 29% |
| Neuroscience | 8 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 4 | 3% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 9 | 7% |
| Unknown | 26 | 19% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. 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 21 June 2017.
All research outputs
#13,860,586
of 22,656,971 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#14,031
of 29,329 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#135,666
of 180,267 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#158
of 239 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,656,971 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,329 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 49th percentile – i.e., 49% 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 180,267 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 239 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.