↓ Skip to main content

Polish pseudo-words list: dataset of 3023 stimuli with competent judges’ ratings

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 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
Polish pseudo-words list: dataset of 3023 stimuli with competent judges’ ratings
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, September 2015
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01395
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kamil K. Imbir, Tomasz Spustek, Jarosław Żygierewicz

Abstract

Pseudo-words are stimuli, which are useful in research concerning lexical processing. As in the case of existing words, they are language dependent; thus, they should be generated for each language separately. The Polish Pseudo-words List (PPwL) is a dataset presenting a set of 3023 stimuli (words of 4-13 letters long). They were generated using an algorithm substituting random letters in existing words with respect to the frequency of letters in certain positions. We put out the raw set for a competent judges' assessment and included the responses in the dataset. PPwL allows the choice of suitable control stimuli for experiments concerning lexical processing.

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

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Poland 1 11%
Unknown 8 89%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 33%
Professor > Associate Professor 2 22%
Professor 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Student > Doctoral Student 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 1 11%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 6 67%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 1 11%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Unknown 1 11%
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 15 September 2015.
All research outputs
#18,426,826
of 22,828,180 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#22,166
of 29,801 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#193,756
of 268,887 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#450
of 572 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,828,180 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 29,801 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 268,887 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 572 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.