Cited by 306Language Development and DisordersPhonetics and Phonology ResearchReading and Literacy Development

Statistical clustering and the contents of the infant vocabulary

Open access
Swingley, Daniel·2005·Cognitive Psychology

Abstract

Infants parse speech into word-sized units according to biases that develop in the first year. One bias, present before the age of 7 months, is to cluster syllables that tend to co-occur. The present computational research demonstrates that this statistical clustering bias could lead to the extraction of speech sequences that are actual words, rather than missegmentations. In English and Dutch, these word-forms exhibit the strong-weak (trochaic) pattern that guides lexical segmentation after 8 months, suggesting that the trochaic parsing bias is learned as a generalization from statistically extracted bisyllables, and not via attention to short utterances or to high-frequency bisyllables. Extracted word-forms come from various syntactic classes, and exhibit distributional characteristics enabling rudimentary sorting of words into syntactic categories. The results highlight the importance of infants' first year in language learning: though they may know the meanings of very few words, infants are well on their way to building a vocabulary.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2004.06.001

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The difference in categorization performance as a function of label statistical structure indicates that the output of statistical learning shares properties of real words.

    “The difference in categorization performance as a function of label statistical structure indicates that the output of statistical learning shares properties of real words, consistent with theories that posit that statistical learning yields word-like representations (e.g., Saffran, 2001; Swingley, 2005).”

    From Statistically coherent labels facilitate categorization in 8-month-olds (2014) · cites this paper as Swingley, 2005

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Swingley, D.
Affiliations
Max Planck Society (DE)
Corresponding author
Swingley, Daniel
Venue
Cognitive Psychology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2005-02
Volume
50
Issue
1
Pages
86-132
ISSN
0010-0285 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2136549906
Cited by
306
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 6 · 2022: 46 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 13 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 16 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 19 · 2014: 17 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 16
FWCI
11.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Cognitive Psychology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Max Planck Institute for Plasma Physics (submittedVersion)
  • Max Planck Digital Library (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • MPG.PuRe (Max Planck Society) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
  • Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek
  • Max-Planck-Gesellschaft
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
Keywords
statistical learning, word learning, vocabulary acquisition, word segmentation, first year of life
MeSH terms
Child Language, Humans, Infant, Phonetics, Semantics, Speech Perception, Vocabulary, Cluster Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review