↓ Skip to main content

Syntactic flexibility and planning scope: the effect of verb bias on advance planning during sentence recall

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
31 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
Syntactic flexibility and planning scope: the effect of verb bias on advance planning during sentence recall
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, October 2014
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01174
Pubmed ID
Authors

Maartje van de Velde, Antje S. Meyer

Abstract

In sentence production, grammatical advance planning scope depends on contextual factors (e.g., time pressure), linguistic factors (e.g., ease of structural processing), and cognitive factors (e.g., production speed). The present study tests the influence of the availability of multiple syntactic alternatives (i.e., syntactic flexibility) on the scope of advance planning during the recall of Dutch dative phrases. We manipulated syntactic flexibility by using verbs with a strong bias or a weak bias toward one structural alternative in sentence frames accepting both verbs (e.g., strong/weak bias: De ober schotelt/serveert de klant de maaltijd [voor] "The waiter dishes out/serves the customer the meal"). To assess lexical planning scope, we varied the frequency of the first post-verbal noun (N1, Experiment 1) or the second post-verbal noun (N2, Experiment 2). In each experiment, 36 speakers produced the verb phrases in a rapid serial visual presentation (RSVP) paradigm. On each trial, they read a sentence presented one word at a time, performed a short distractor task, and then saw a sentence preamble (e.g., De ober…) which they had to complete to form the presented sentence. Onset latencies were compared using linear mixed effects models. N1 frequency did not produce any effects. N2 frequency only affected sentence onsets in the weak verb bias condition and especially in slow speakers. These findings highlight the dependency of planning scope during sentence recall on the grammatical properties of the verb and the frequency of post-verbal nouns. Implications for utterance planning in everyday speech are discussed.

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 31 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Mexico 1 3%
United States 1 3%
Netherlands 1 3%
Unknown 28 90%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 35%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 16%
Student > Bachelor 2 6%
Student > Master 2 6%
Student > Postgraduate 2 6%
Other 3 10%
Unknown 6 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 13 42%
Linguistics 5 16%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 6%
Arts and Humanities 1 3%
Social Sciences 1 3%
Other 2 6%
Unknown 7 23%
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 30 September 2014.
All research outputs
#18,379,018
of 22,764,165 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,042
of 29,677 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#185,353
of 259,226 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#331
of 382 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,764,165 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 29,677 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 19th percentile – i.e., 19% 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 259,226 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 382 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 3rd percentile – i.e., 3% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.