The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Examining Dutch children’s vocabularies across infancy and toddlerhood: Demographic effects are age-specific and task-specific
Open accessAbstract
Limited studies have examined demographic differences in children’s vocabulary in longitudinal samples, while there are questions regarding the duration, direction, and magnitude of these effects across development. In this longitudinal study, we included over 400 Dutch children. Caregivers filled out N-CDIs when children were 9–11 months (measuring word comprehension, word production, and gestures) and around 2–5 years of age (measuring word production). At 2–5 years, we also administered a receptive vocabulary task in the lab. We examined demographic effects on vocabulary size across infancy and toddlerhood. We found a disadvantage for males in infants’ gestures and toddlers’ vocabulary production. We found a negative effect of maternal education on infants’ caregiver-reported vocabulary, but a positive effect on toddlers’ lab-administered receptive vocabulary. Lastly, we found a negative effect of multilingualism – but only for the lab-administered task. Examining predictors in large, longitudinal samples ensures their robustness and generalisability across development.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
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?
In the citing paper
“For infants in this age group, the gesture scale appears to be a relatively reliable measure of early vocabulary.”
From The role of dyadic combinations of infants' behaviors and caregivers' verbal and multimodal responses in predicting vocabulary outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as van der Klis et al., 2024
In the citing paper
“Compared to the vocabulary scales for infants, the gesture scale does not suffer from floor effects for this age group, and it is the only scale that correlates with children's longitudinal vocabulary outcomes (van der Klis et al., 2024).”
From The role of dyadic combinations of infants' behaviors and caregivers' verbal and multimodal responses in predicting vocabulary outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as van der Klis et al., 2024
In the citing paper
“Compared to the vocabulary scales for infants, the gesture scale does not suffer from floor effects for this age group, and it is the only scale that correlates with children's longitudinal vocabulary outcomes (van der Klis et al., 2024).”
From The role of dyadic combinations of infants' behaviors and caregivers' verbal and multimodal responses in predicting vocabulary outcomes (2025) · cites this paper as van der Klis et al., 2024
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The relation between pointing and language development: A meta-analysis
Colonnesi, C., Stams, G. J. J. M., Koster, I., & Noom, M. J. (2010) · Developmental Review · doi:10.1016/j.dr.2010.10.001 · Cited by 405
BROOKS, R., & MELTZOFF, A. N. (2008) · Journal of Child Language · doi:10.1017/s030500090700829x · Cited by 404
Feldman, H. M., Dollaghan, C. A., Campbell, T. F., Kurs-Lasky, M., Janosky, J. E., & Paradise, J. L. (2000) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/1467-8624.00146 · Cited by 364
REESE, E., & READ, S. (2000) · Journal of Child Language · doi:10.1017/s0305000900004098 · Cited by 119
Cross-language distance influences receptive vocabulary outcomes of bilingual children
Blom, E., Boerma, T., Bosma, E., Cornips, L., van den Heuij, K., & Timmermeister, M. (2020) · First Language · doi:10.1177/0142723719892794 · Cited by 43
Flagged first, then by citations
Research works printed but not linked: 36
- 10.7551/mitpress/11577.001.0001 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0305000998003456 · DOI
- 10.1044/1092-4388(2003/046) · DOI
- Schlichting, 2005, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III-NL
- 10.1111/infa.12469 · DOI
- 10.1073/pnas.2300671120 · DOI
- 10.1017/S0305000907008124 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2011.09.023 · DOI
- 10.1044/0161-1461.3001.75 · DOI
- 10.1146/annurev-linguistics-011619-030326 · DOI
- 10.1177/0142723713510997 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2010.08.002 · DOI
- 10.1126/science.1167025 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/desc.12019 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1016/j.jpeds.2010.10.032 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00882.x · DOI
- 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2009.08.061 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.infbeh.2021.101552 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.1540-5834.1994.tb00186.x · DOI
- 10.1017/S0305000910000759 · DOI · Paper page
- Kern, 2007, Influence of preterm birth on early lexical and grammatical acquisition, First Language, 27, 159, 10.1177/0142723706075790 · DOI
- 10.1111/1467-8624.00612 · DOI · Paper page
- Pan, 2004, Measuring productive vocabulary of toddlers in low-income families: Concurrent and predictive validity of three sources of data, Journal of Child Language, 31, 587, 10.1017/S0305000904006270 · DOI
- 10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100868 · DOI
- Fenson, 2007, The MacArthur Communicative Development Inventories: User’s guide and technical manual
- 10.1017/S0305000908008726 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1111/1460-6984.12082 · DOI
- 10.1111/j.2044-835X.2011.02042.x · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0142716412000744 · DOI
- 10.1177/0142723717730484 · DOI
- 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1177161 · DOI
- 10.5351/CSAM.2015.22.6.665 · DOI
- 10.1080/17549500903147560 · DOI
- 10.1007/s10882-006-9016-6 · DOI
- 10.2307/1166093 · DOI · Paper page
- 10.1017/S0305000907008070 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
van der Klis, A., Junge, C., Adriaans, F., & Kager, R. (2025) · Infancy · doi:10.1111/infa.12626 · Cited by 5
“Compared to the vocabulary scales for infants, the gesture scale does not suffer from floor effects for this age group, and it is the only scale that correlates with children's longitudinal vocabulary outcomes (van der Klis et al., 2024).”
Self-citation
Metadata
- Authors
- van der Klis, A., Junge, C., Adriaans, F., & Kager, R.
- Affiliations
- Utrecht University (NL)
- Corresponding author
- van der Klis, Anika
- Venue
- Journal of Child Language
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press (CUP)
- Published
- 2024-05-10
- Volume
- 52
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 709-728
- ISSN
- 0305-0009 (ISSN-L)
- 1469-7602
- OpenAlex
- W4396811086
- Cited by
- 3
- References
- 5
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 1
- FWCI
- 2.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
- doi.org
- Locations
- Journal of Child Language (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- demographic differences, gender differences, maternal education, multilingualism, word comprehension, word production, gesture, receptive vocabulary, infancy, toddlerhood, Dutch children
- MeSH terms
- Age Factors, Child Language, Child, Preschool, Female, Gestures, Humans, Infant, Language Development, Longitudinal Studies, Male, Netherlands, Vocabulary, Multilingualism
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
