The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 9 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 |
Second Language Interference during First Language Processing by Arabic–English Bilinguals
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Psychology, November 2017
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01956 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Tahani Alsaigh, Shelia M Kennison |
| Abstract |
The research investigated whether a bilinguals' second language (L2) is activated during a task involving only the first language (L1). We tested the hypothesis that the amount of L2 interference can vary across settings, with less interference occurring in testing locations where L2 is rarely used. In Experiment 1, we compared language processing for 50 Arabic-English bilinguals tested in Saudi Arabia and 49 Arabic-English tested in the United States. In the task, participants viewed a picture and judged whether a phoneme presented over headphones was part of the L1 picture name. The results showed no effect of testing location on processing. For both groups of bilinguals, we observed L2 interference in mean error rates, but not in mean response times. We also found evidence for L2 interference in correlational analyses between response times and (a) participants' weekly L2 usage and (b) frequency of English picture names. A second experiment with 24 Arabic monolinguals supported the conclusion that the results with bilinguals were due to L2 interference. Implications for theories of bilingual memory are discussed. |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Costa Rica | 1 | 11% |
| United States | 1 | 11% |
| Unknown | 7 | 78% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 89% |
| Scientists | 1 | 11% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 39 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 39 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 8 | 21% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 15% |
| Student > Bachelor | 5 | 13% |
| Lecturer | 3 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 7 | 18% |
| Unknown | 8 | 21% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Linguistics | 11 | 28% |
| Psychology | 6 | 15% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 8% |
| Unspecified | 2 | 5% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 5% |
| Other | 3 | 8% |
| Unknown | 12 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 18. 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 21 July 2022.
All research outputs
#2,081,818
of 26,097,697 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Psychology
#4,220
of 34,983 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#39,717
of 346,599 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Psychology
#101
of 620 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,097,697 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 92nd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 34,983 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 13.6. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 346,599 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 620 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.