The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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.
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 |
Statistical learning of a tonal language: the influence of bilingualism and previous linguistic experience
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2014
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00953 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tianlin Wang, Jenny R Saffran |
| Abstract |
While research shows that adults attend to both segmental and suprasegmental regularities in speech, including syllabic transitional probabilities as well as stress and intonational patterns, little is known about how statistical learning operates given input from tonal languages. In the current study, we designed an artificial tone language to address several questions: can adults track regularities in a tonal language? Is learning enhanced by previous exposure to tone-marking languages? Does bilingualism affect learning in this task? To address these questions, we contrasted the performance of English monolingual adults (Experiment 1), Mandarin monolingual and Mandarin-English bilingual adults (Experiment 2), and non-tonal bilingual adults (Experiment 3) in a statistical learning task using an artificial tone language. The pattern of results suggests that while prior exposure to tonal languages did not lead to significant improvements in performance, bilingual experience did enhance learning outcomes. This study represents the first demonstration of statistical learning of an artificial tone language and suggests a complex interplay between prior language experience and subsequent language learning. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 33% |
| Unknown | 2 | 67% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 67% |
| Scientists | 1 | 33% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 131 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 3% |
| Israel | 1 | <1% |
| Hong Kong | 1 | <1% |
| Spain | 1 | <1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 123 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 25% |
| Student > Master | 24 | 18% |
| Researcher | 18 | 14% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 9% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 6 | 5% |
| Other | 16 | 12% |
| Unknown | 22 | 17% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 47 | 36% |
| Linguistics | 29 | 22% |
| Neuroscience | 12 | 9% |
| Social Sciences | 7 | 5% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 4 | 3% |
| Unknown | 29 | 22% |
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 03 September 2014.
All research outputs
#15,177,072
of 23,344,526 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#16,544
of 31,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#132,175
of 239,163 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#268
of 366 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,344,526 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 31,066 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 12.6. This one is in the 38th percentile – i.e., 38% 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 239,163 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 366 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.