↓ Skip to main content

Imitated Prosodic Fluency Predicts Reading Comprehension Ability in Good and Poor High School Readers

Overview of attention for article published in Frontiers in Psychology, July 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
70 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
Imitated Prosodic Fluency Predicts Reading Comprehension Ability in Good and Poor High School Readers
Published in
Frontiers in Psychology, July 2016
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2016.01026
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mara Breen, Lianne Kaswer, Julie A. Van Dyke, Jelena Krivokapić, Nicole Landi

Abstract

Researchers have established a relationship between beginning readers' silent comprehension ability and their prosodic fluency, such that readers who read aloud with appropriate prosody tend to have higher scores on silent reading comprehension assessments. The current study was designed to investigate this relationship in two groups of high school readers: Specifically Poor Comprehenders (SPCs), who have adequate word level and phonological skills but poor reading comprehension ability, and a group of age- and decoding skill-matched controls. We compared the prosodic fluency of the two groups by determining how effectively they produced prosodic cues to syntactic and semantic structure in imitations of a model speaker's production of syntactically and semantically varied sentences. Analyses of pitch and duration patterns revealed that speakers in both groups produced the expected prosodic patterns; however, controls provided stronger durational cues to syntactic structure. These results demonstrate that the relationship between prosodic fluency and reading comprehension continues past the stage of early reading instruction. Moreover, they suggest that prosodically fluent speakers may also generate more fluent implicit prosodic representations during silent reading, leading to more effective comprehension.

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.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 70 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 1 1%
Unknown 69 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 21%
Student > Master 11 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 5 7%
Researcher 5 7%
Professor 5 7%
Other 9 13%
Unknown 20 29%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 20%
Linguistics 12 17%
Social Sciences 6 9%
Neuroscience 5 7%
Arts and Humanities 4 6%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 23 33%
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 04 August 2016.
All research outputs
#20,336,031
of 22,881,154 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#24,225
of 29,979 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#317,189
of 363,105 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#356
of 398 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,154 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 29,979 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 1st percentile – i.e., 1% 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 363,105 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 398 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.