↓ Skip to main content

Neural Mechanisms of Rapid Sensitivity to Syntactic Anomaly

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (92nd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (77th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
61 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
Neural Mechanisms of Rapid Sensitivity to Syntactic Anomaly
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, January 2013
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2013.00045
Pubmed ID
Authors

Albert E. Kim, Phillip M. Gilley

Abstract

Recent psycholinguistic models hypothesize that anticipatory processing can speed the response to linguistic input during language comprehension by pre-activating representations necessary for word recognition. We investigated the neurocognitive mechanisms of anticipatory processing by recording event-related potentials (ERPs) to syntactically anomalous (The thief was caught by for police) and well-formed (e.g., The thief was caught by the police) sentences. One group of participants saw anomalies elicited by the same word in every instance (e.g., for; low-variability stimuli), providing high affordances for predictions about the word-form appearing in the critical position. A second group saw anomalies elicited by seven different prepositions (at, of, on, for, from, over, with; high-variability stimuli) across the study, creating a more difficult prediction task. Syntactic category anomalies enhanced the occipital-temporal N170 component of the ERP, indicating rapid sensitivity - within 200 ms of word-onset - to syntactic anomaly. For low-variability but not the high-variability stimuli, syntactic anomaly also enhanced the earlier occipital-temporal P1 component, around 130 ms after word-onset, indicating that affordances for prediction engendered earlier sensitivity to syntactic anomaly. Independent components analysis revealed three sources within the ERP signal whose functional dynamics were consistent with predictive processing and early responses to syntactic anomaly. Distributed neural source modeling (sLORETA) of these early active sources produced a candidate network for early responses to words during reading in the right posterior occipital, left occipital-temporal, and medial parietal cortex.

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 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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 61 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 5 8%
United Kingdom 1 2%
Croatia 1 2%
Germany 1 2%
Unknown 53 87%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 25%
Researcher 11 18%
Student > Master 6 10%
Student > Bachelor 5 8%
Professor > Associate Professor 5 8%
Other 11 18%
Unknown 8 13%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 25 41%
Linguistics 10 16%
Neuroscience 6 10%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 5%
Computer Science 2 3%
Other 6 10%
Unknown 9 15%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. 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 20 November 2021.
All research outputs
#2,063,467
of 22,701,287 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,027
of 29,459 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,417
of 280,698 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#214
of 969 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,701,287 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,459 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% 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 280,698 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 92% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 969 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 77% of its contemporaries.