The DOI matches its Crossref record; 120 of the 121 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 88 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.
A new view of language acquisition
Open accessAbstract
At the forefront of debates on language are new data demonstrating infants' early acquisition of information about their native language. The data show that infants perceptually “map” critical aspects of ambient language in the first year of life before they can speak. Statistical properties of speech are picked up through exposure to ambient language. Moreover, linguistic experience alters infants' perception of speech, warping perception in the service of language. Infants' strategies are unexpected and unpredicted by historical views. A new theoretical position has emerged, and six postulates of this position are described.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
Kuhl proposes a new view of language acquisition in which infants map ambient language through pattern detection, statistical learning, and experience-driven perceptual warping, rather than Skinnerian reinforcement or Chomskyan selection of innate universal grammar/phonetics. Six postulates are offered, including that motherese is instructive and that the critical period depends on neural commitment from experience, not just time.
Key findings
- Infants initially parse phonetic units universally, but this capacity is not speech-specific or species-specific: categorical perception occurs in infants and animals and for nonspeech stimuli; by 12 months infants no longer discriminate non-native phonetic contrasts even though they did so at 6 months.
- Infants exploit statistical properties of speech: 7-month-olds discriminated target syllables better when the transitional probability between /ko/ and /ga/ was 1.0 than when it was reduced to 0.3; 8-month-olds listened longer to new pseudowords formed from parts of original words, indicating statistical word segmentation.
- Language experience warps perception: 6-month-old US and Swedish infants showed the perceptual magnet effect only for native vowel prototypes; Japanese listeners’ multidimensional scaling map for /r-l/ showed no magnet or boundary effects, unlike American listeners.
- Vocal imitation and motherese are linked to learning: by 20 weeks infants clearly imitate /a/, /i/, and /u/ with appropriate relative formant values; infant-directed speech exaggerates vowels in the US, Russia, and Sweden; six tenets include that the critical period is influenced by neural commitment resulting from experience.
Methods
- Theoretical review/colloquium paper, not a new empirical study; it synthesizes behavioral, brain, comparative, and cross-linguistic infant studies.
- No new sample is reported; cited experiments include infants at ages such as 6, 7, 8, 9, and 12 months and 12–20 weeks, plus adults and nonhuman animals.
- Main analysis is narrative synthesis and proposal of six postulates and the Native Language Magnet model; no primary statistical analysis is reported.
Limitations
- Stated: further tests are needed to determine the constraints on categorization, statistical learning, and prototype effects in infants using linguistic and nonlinguistic events; whether constraints for physical objects and speech are identical or different “remains to be examined”; animal/human differences “can be resolved with empirical tests.”
- Evident: as a review, it reports no new experimental data or formal meta-analysis, so conclusions rest on cited studies; some claims, such as bilingual separation effects, are described as anecdotal or hypothetical.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
49 Own interpretation · 44 Not checked yet · 5 No basis given · 3 Own result
In the paper
“At this age, infants clearly imitate the model, and their vowels have appropriate formant frequency values in relation to one another, even though infants' vowels occur in a much higher frequency range (93).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [93] Kuhl P K, Meltzoff A N. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100:2425–2438. doi: 10.1121/1.417951. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“At this age, infants clearly imitate the model, and their vowels have appropriate formant frequency values in relation to one another, even though infants' vowels occur in a much higher frequency range (93).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [93] Kuhl P K, Meltzoff A N. J Acoust Soc Am. 1996;100:2425–2438. doi: 10.1121/1.417951. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Infant-directed speech also is altered at the phonetic level and these alterations are argued to help infants learn.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The results demonstrated that the phonetic units of infant-directed speech are acoustically exaggerated.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [106] Kuhl P K, Andruski J E, Chistovich I A, Chistovich L A, Kozhevnikova E V, Ryskina V L, Stolyarova E I, Sundberg U, Lacerda F. Science. 1997;277:684–686. doi: 10.1126/science.277.5326.684. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The results show a stretching of the acoustic space encompassing speech (Fig. 8).”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Infants discriminated only between stimuli from different phonetic categories (12–14).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [12] Eimas P D, Siqueland E R, Jusczyk P, Vigorito J. Science. 1971;171:303–306. doi: 10.1126/science.171.3968.303. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [13] Eimas P D. Percept Psychophys. 1974;16:513–521. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [14] Eimas P D. Percept Psychophys. 1975;18:341–347. [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“First, infants detect patterns in language input.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“These data, indicating that there is not an immutable loss of phonetic abilities for non-native units (32), did not refute the selectionist position.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [32] Werker J F. In: An Invitation to Cognitive Science: Language. Gleitman L R, Liberman M, editors. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 1995. pp. 87–107. [Google Scholar]
hedged- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This finding supported the view that domain-general mechanisms were responsible for infants' initial partitioning of the phonetic units of language.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Moreover, unlike adults, infants demonstrated the effect for the phonetic units of all languages (15, 16).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [15] Lasky R E, Syrdal-Lasky A, Klein R E. J Exp Child Psych. 1975;20:215–225. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(75)90099-5. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [16] Streeter L A. Nature (London) 1976;259:39–41. doi: 10.1038/259039a0. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 22
- Probably not a substantial claim. 7
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“The results demonstrate developmental change between 12 and 20 weeks—by 20 weeks, there is clear separation between the three vowel categories for infants (Fig. 7).”
boostedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Adults discriminated phonetic units that crossed the “phonetic boundary” between categories but not stimuli that fell within a category.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [10] Liberman A M, Cooper F S, Shankweiler D P, Studdert-Kennedy M. Psychol Rev. 1967;74:431–461. doi: 10.1037/h0020279. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A result the paper reports from its own data — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Interestingly, however, the data also demonstrated that the kind of partitioning seen for speech is not limited to humans or limited to speech.”
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Werker and her colleagues demonstrated that, by 12 months of age, infants no longer discriminate non-native phonetic contrasts, even though they did so at 6 months of age (31).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [31] Werker J F, Tees R C. Inf Behav Dev. 1984;7:49–63. [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Infants' strategies are unexpected and unpredicted by historical views.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
In the paper
“The phenomenon was language-specific; Japanese adults, for example, failed to show a peak in discrimination at the phonetic boundary of an American English/ra-la/series (as in “rake” vs. “lake”) (11).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [11] Miyawaki K, Strange W, Verbrugge R, Liberman A M, Jenkins J J, Fujimura O. Percept Psychophys. 1975;18:331–340. [Google Scholar] source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Research on cognitive development confirms the fact that categorization (83), statistical learning (84), and prototype effects (85) are not unique to speech.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [83] Younger B A, Cohen L B. In: The Psychology of Learning and Motivation. Bower G H, editor. Vol. 19. San Diego: Academic; 1985. pp. 211–247. [Google Scholar]
- Not checked yetcites [84] Saffran J R, Johnson E K, Aslin R N, Newport E L. Cognition. 1999;70:27–52. doi: 10.1016/s0010-0277(98)00075-4. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [85] Quinn P C, Eimas P D. J Exp Child Psychol. 1998;69:151–174. doi: 10.1006/jecp.1998.2443. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The two systems are thus tightly coupled early on, but the coupling is seen as a coregistration of auditory and motor information, a polymodal mapping, rather than one in which the representation is specified in motor terms.”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Perceptual experience that guides sensory-motor learning also is seen in infants' imitation of nonspeech oral movements (94, 95) and in sign language (96).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [94] Meltzoff A N, Moore M K. Early Dev Parent. 1977;6:179–192. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0917(199709/12)6:3/4<179::AID-EDP157>3.0.CO;2-R. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
- Not checked yetcites [95] Meltzoff A N, Moore M K. Inf Behav Dev. 1994;17:83–99. doi: 10.1016/0163-6383(94)90024-8. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [96] Petitto L A, Marentette P F. Science. 1991;251:1493–1496. doi: 10.1126/science.2006424. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“A model reflecting this developmental sequence from universal perception to language-specific perception, called the Native Language Magnet model, proposes that infants' mapping of ambient language warps the acoustic dimensions underlying speech, producing a complex network, or filter, through which language is perceived (39, 40, 82).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [39] Kuhl P K. Curr Opin Neurobiol. 1994;4:812–822. doi: 10.1016/0959-4388(94)90128-7. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [40] Kuhl P K. In: The New Cognitive Neurosciences. 2nd Ed. Gazzaniga M S, editor. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2000. pp. 99–115. [Google Scholar]
- Not checked yetcites [82] Kuhl P K. In: Mechanistic Relationships Between Development and Learning. Carew T J, Menzel R, Shatz C J, editors. New York: Wiley; 1998. pp. 53–73. [Google Scholar]
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
In the paper
“This universal contouring soon gives way to a language-specific mapping that distorts perception, completely revising the perceptual space underlying speech processing (65).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [65] Kuhl P K, Williams K A, Lacerda F, Stevens K N, Lindblom B. Science. 1992;255:606–608. doi: 10.1126/science.1736364. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“Vocal learning critically depends on hearing the vocalizations of others and hearing oneself produce sound.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“Mothers addressing infants also increase the variety of exemplars they use, behaving in a way that makes mothers resemble many different talkers, a feature shown to assist category learning in second-language learners (107).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [107] Lively S E, Logan J S, Pisoni D B. J Acoust Soc Am. 1993;94:1242–1255. doi: 10.1121/1.408177. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“They also present new words in a great variety of contexts, which would highlight the internal transitional probabilities of the new words against the backdrop of a variety of contexts (58).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [58] Goodsitt J V, Morgan J L, Kuhl P K. J Child Lang. 1993;20:229–252. doi: 10.1017/s0305000900008266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar] source
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“These studies show that feedback and reinforcement are not necessary in this process; listeners simply need the right kind of listening experience (36, 113).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] McClelland J L, Thomas A, McCandliss B D, Fiez J A. In: Brain, Behavioral, and Cognitive Disorders: The Neurocomputational Perspective. Reggia J, Ruppin E, Glanzman D, editors. Oxford: Elsevier; 1999. pp. 75–80. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [113] Pisoni D B. In: Speech Perception, Production and Linguistic Structure. Tohkura Y, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Sagisaka Y, editors. Tokyo: Ohmsha; 1992. pp. 143–151. [Google Scholar]
boosted- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“When introducing new words, parents repeat the word often in sterotyped frames (“Where's the __ ,” “See the __ ,” “That's a __ ” (110), which would highlight the items in sentence-final position.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [110] Peters A M. The Units of Language Acquisition. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press; 1983. [Google Scholar]
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This may be the case because it is easier to map two different sets of phonetic categories (one for each of the two languages) if they can be perceptually separated.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
- Rests on an assumption: Infants exposed to two languages do much better if each parent speaks one of the two languages, rather than both parents speaking both languages.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The hypothesis is that, for Japanese people, learning to process English requires the development of a new map, one more appropriate for English.”
hedgeddirect- Asserted: fails — The authors may not put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The authors may not put it forward as true.
In the paper
“Data gathered by using functional MRI techniques indicate that adult bilinguals who acquire both languages early in life activate overlapping regions of the brain when processing the two languages, whereas those who learn the second language later in life activate two distinct regions of the brain for the two languages (114).”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [114] Kim K H S, Relkin N R, Lee K M, Hirsch J. Nature (London) 1997;388:172–174. doi: 10.1038/40623. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
hedgedcorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Early in life, interference effects are minimal and two different mappings can be acquired, as is the case for infants learning two languages.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“New training studies suggest that exaggerating the dimensions of foreign language contrasts (36), as well as providing listeners with multiple instances spoken by many talkers (113), are effective training methods.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [36] McClelland J L, Thomas A, McCandliss B D, Fiez J A. In: Brain, Behavioral, and Cognitive Disorders: The Neurocomputational Perspective. Reggia J, Ruppin E, Glanzman D, editors. Oxford: Elsevier; 1999. pp. 75–80. [Google Scholar] source
- Not checked yetcites [113] Pisoni D B. In: Speech Perception, Production and Linguistic Structure. Tohkura Y, Vatikiotis-Bateson E, Sagisaka Y, editors. Tokyo: Ohmsha; 1992. pp. 143–151. [Google Scholar]
hedgeddirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Exaggerating speech not only makes it more discriminable for infants, it highlights critical parameters used in the native language.”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The learning strategies used by infants may themselves have influenced the nature of language, in much the same way that general auditory processing influenced the selection of phonetic units for language during its evolution.”
hedgedconditional- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: fails — It may be too vague to check against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. It may be too vague to check against evidence. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Infants are neither the tabula rasas that Skinner described nor the innate grammarians that Chomsky envisioned.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(iv) vocal imitation links speech perception and production early, and auditory, visual, and motor information are coregistered for speech categories;”
plaincorrelational- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“(v) adults addressing infants unconsciously alter their speech to match infants' learning strategies, and this is instrumental in supporting infants' initial mapping of speech;”
plaindirect- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper may give no reason why it holds. It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Language is thus innately discoverable, but not innate in the way that selectionist models suggested.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper relies on this without support.
Infants' performance in laboratory speech perception tasks reflects the mechanisms underlying natural language acquisition.
“The data show that infants perceptually “map” critical aspects of ambient language in the first year of life before they can speak.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Listening preferences in infancy indicate language-specific learning.
“American infants tested at 6 months show no listening preference for words with the strong/weak as opposed to the weak/strong pattern, but by 9 months they exhibit a strong preference for the pattern typical of their native language (55).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The statistical learning demonstrated with artificial speech stimuli generalizes to natural language acquisition.
“New research shows that infants detect and exploit the statistical properties of the language they hear to find word candidates in running speech before they know the meanings of words.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Children learn language more naturally and efficiently than adults.
“There is no doubt that children learn language more naturally and efficiently than adults, a paradox given adults' superior cognitive skills.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Infants exposed to two languages do much better if each parent speaks one of the two languages, rather than both parents speaking both languages.
“Anecdotal evidence suggests that infants exposed to two languages do much better if each parent speaks one of the two languages, rather than both parents speaking both languages.”
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
“Humans are easily able to acquire huge amounts of biologically primary knowledge outside of educational contexts and without a discernible working memory load.”
From An Evolutionary Upgrade of Cognitive Load Theory: Using the Human Motor System and Collaboration to Support the Learning of Complex Cognitive Tasks (2012) · cites this paper as Kuhl 2000
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.
Rated minor: it would not touch a result — a value no result rests on, a p-value that stays on the same side of the significance level, or a conflict that is clerical, resolved elsewhere in the paper, or outside its own findings.
In the paper
§ References
“94.Meltzoff A N, Moore M K. Early Dev Parent. 1977;6:179–192.”
§ References
“doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1099-0917(199709/12)6:3/4<179::AID-EDP157>3.0.CO;2-R.”
Citations
Cites
Fodor, J. A. (1983) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/4737.001.0001 · Cited by 7,734
Skinner, B. F. (1957) · doi:10.1037/11256-000 · Cited by 5,759
Statistical learning by 8-month-old infants
Saffran, J. R., Aslin, R. N., & Newport, E. L. (1996) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.274.5294.1926 · Cited by 5,659
The Psychology of Learning and Motivation
(2021) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(21)x0002-3 · Cited by 5,082
Perception of the speech code.
Liberman, A. M., Cooper, F. S., Shankweiler, D. P., & Studdert-Kennedy, M. (1967) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/h0020279 · Cited by 3,722
Chomsky (1959) · doi:10.2307/411334 · Cited by 3,425
Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (1984) · Infant Behavior and Development · doi:10.1016/s0163-6383(84)80022-3 · Cited by 2,801
Gallistel, C. R. (1990) · Cited by 2,571
Gazzaniga, M. S., & Bizzi, E. (2000) · Cited by 2,547
Of Human Bonding: Newborns Prefer Their Mothers' Voices
DeCasper, A. J., & Fifer, W. P. (1980) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.7375928 · Cited by 2,317
Research works printed but not linked: 7
- K Wexler, P W Culicover Formal Principles of Language Acquisition (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1980).
- K N Stevens Acoustic Phonetics (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1998).
- J M Pickett The Acoustics of Speech Communication (Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1999).
- N Gross, P C Judge, O Port, S H Wildstrom BusinessWeek, February 23, 60–72. (1998).
- J F Werker An Invitation to Cognitive Science: Language, eds L R Gleitman, M Liberman (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA), pp. 87–107 (1995).
- P K Kuhl Child Phonology: Vol. 2. Perception, eds G H Yeni-Komshian, J F Kavanagh, C A Ferguson (Academic, New York), pp. 41–66 (1980).
- K H S Kim, N R Relkin, K M Lee, J Hirsch Nature (London) 388, 172–174 (1997).
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Jackendoff, R. S. (2002) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.001.0001 · Cited by 4,542
Implications for educational practice of the science of learning and development
Darling-Hammond, L., Flook, L., Cook-Harvey, C., Barron, B., & Osher, D. (2020) · Applied Developmental Science · doi:10.1080/10888691.2018.1537791 · Cited by 2,733
“Neuroscientists have also demonstrated that the development of neural pathways is associated with exposure to and generation of language (Kuhl, 2000).”
BackgroundEarly language acquisition: cracking the speech code
Kuhl, P. K. (2004) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1533 · Cited by 2,291
Self-citationHensch, T. K. (2004) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144327 · Cited by 1,300
Kuhl, P. K., Tsao, F.-M., & Liu, H.-M. (2003) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.1532872100 · Cited by 1,237
Self-citationKuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Coffey-Corina, S., Padden, D., Rivera-Gaxiola, M., & Nelson, T. (2008) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2154 · Cited by 886
Self-citationInfants show a facilitation effect for native language phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months
Kuhl, P. K., Stevens, E., Hayashi, A., Deguchi, T., Kiritani, S., & Iverson, P. (2006) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2006.00468.x · Cited by 867
Self-citationThe neuroanatomical and functional organization of speech perception
Scott, S. K., & Johnsrude, I. S. (2003) · Trends in Neurosciences · doi:10.1016/s0166-2236(02)00037-1 · Cited by 704
A perceptual interference account of acquisition difficulties for non-native phonemes
Iverson, P., Kuhl, P. K., Akahane-Yamada, R., Diesch, E., Tohkura, Y., Kettermann, A., & Siebert, C. (2002) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00198-1 · Cited by 693
Self-citationTsao, F.-M., Liu, H.-M., & Kuhl, P. K. (2004) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00726.x · Cited by 588
Self-citationThe Revised Speech Learning Model (SLM-r)
Flege, J. E., & Bohn, O.-S. (2021) · Second Language Speech Learning · doi:10.1017/9781108886901.002 · Cited by 429
Age and second language acquisition and processing: A selective overview
Birdsong, D. (2006) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2006.00353.x · Cited by 544
Kuhl, P. K., Coffey‐Corina, S., Padden, D., & Dawson, G. (2005) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2004.00384.x · Cited by 512
Self-citationPaas, F., & Sweller, J. (2012) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-011-9179-2 · Cited by 502
Improving language and literacy is a matter of time
Tallal, P. (2004) · Nature Reviews Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1499 · Cited by 488
EEG complexity as a biomarker for autism spectrum disorder risk
Bosl, W., Tierney, A., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Nelson, C. (2011) · BMC Medicine · doi:10.1186/1741-7015-9-18 · Cited by 485
Early speech perception and later language development: implications for the “critical period”
Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Padden, D., Nelson, T., & Pruitt, J. (2005) · Language Learning and Development · doi:10.1080/15475441.2005.9671948 · Cited by 482
Self-citationInterpersonal synchrony: a survey of evaluation methods across disciplines.
Delaherche, E., Chetouani, M., Mahdhaoui, A., Saint-Georges, C., Viaux, S., & Cohen, D. (2012) · IEEE Transactions on Affective Computing · doi:10.1109/t-affc.2012.12 · Cited by 474
An association between mothers' speech clarity and infants' speech discrimination skills
Liu, H., Kuhl, P. K., & Tsao, F. (2003) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/1467-7687.00275 · Cited by 466
Self-citationPosner, M. I., & Rothbart, M. K. (2007) · American Psychological Association eBooks · doi:10.1037/11519-000 · Cited by 449
Marcelli, D. (2009) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-2-294-70703-2.50001-2 · Cited by 430
Development of infants’ attention to faces during the first year
Frank, M. C., Vul, E., & Johnson, S. P. (2008) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2008.11.010 · Cited by 415
Brain potentials to native and non-native speech contrasts in 7- and 11-month-old American infants
Rivera‐Gaxiola, M., Silva‐Pereyra, J., & Kuhl, P. K. (2005) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2005.00403.x · Cited by 413
Self-citationNeural specializations for speech and pitch: moving beyond the dichotomies
Zatorre, R. J., & Gandour, J. T. (2007) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2007.2161 · Cited by 410
Werker, J. F., & Tees, R. C. (2005) · Developmental Psychobiology · doi:10.1002/dev.20060 · Cited by 394
Neural mechanisms of birdsong memory
Bolhuis, J. J., & Gahr, M. L. (2006) · Nature reviews. Neuroscience · doi:10.1038/nrn1904 · Cited by 386
Effects of Early Auditory Experience on the Spoken Language of Deaf Children at 3 Years of Age
Nicholas, J. G., & Geers, A. E. (2006) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/01.aud.0000215973.76912.c6 · Cited by 371
The nature of generalization in language
Goldberg, A. E. (2009) · Cognitive Linguistics · doi:10.1515/cogl.2009.005 · Cited by 378
Acoustic and perceptual evaluation of Mandarin tone productions before and after perceptual training
Wang, Y., Jongman, A., & Sereno, J. A. (2003) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1531176 · Cited by 368
Persistent stress ‘deafness’: The case of French learners of Spanish
Emmanuel Dupoux, A., Sebastián‐Gallés, N., Navarrete, E., & Sharon Peperkamp, A. (2007) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.001 · Cited by 345
Educating the Whole Child: Improving School Climate to Support Student Success
Darling‐Hammond, L., & Cook-Harvey, C. M. (2018) · doi:10.54300/145.655 · Cited by 379
Age of acquisition: Its neural and computational mechanisms.
Hernández, A. E., & Li, P. (2007) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.133.4.638 · Cited by 345
Learning Factorized Multimodal Representations
Tsai, Y.-H. H., Liang, P. P., Zadeh, A., Morency, L.-P., & Salakhutdinov, R. (2018) · arXiv · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1806.06176 · Cited by 323
Assessing constraints on second-language segmental production and perception
Flege, J. E. (2003) · Mouton eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110895094.319 · Cited by 320
Language Acquisition and Brain Development
Sakai, K. L. (2005) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1113530 · Cited by 317
Non-native speech perception in adverse conditions: A review
Lecumberri, M. L. G., Cooke, M. P., & Cutler, A. (2010) · Speech Communication · doi:10.1016/j.specom.2010.08.014 · Cited by 328
The Effects of Feature‐Label‐Order and Their Implications for Symbolic Learning
Ramscar, M., Yarlett, D. G., Dye, M., Denny, K., & Thorpe, K. (2010) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/j.1551-6709.2009.01092.x · Cited by 299
McNeil, N. M., & Alibali, M. W. (2005) · Child Development · doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2005.00884.x · Cited by 303
The Vowel Systems of Quichua-Spanish Bilinguals
Guion, S. G. (2003) · Phonetica · doi:10.1159/000071449 · Cited by 282
Iverson, P., Hazan, V. L., & Bannister, K. (2005) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.2062307 · Cited by 277
Neural Substrates of Language Acquisition
Kuhl, P., & Rivera-Gaxiola, M. (2008) · Annual Review of Neuroscience · doi:10.1146/annurev.neuro.30.051606.094321 · Cited by 275
Self-citationLearning new sounds of speech: reallocation of neural substrates
Golestani, N., & Zatorre, R. J. (2003) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/j.neuroimage.2003.09.071 · Cited by 273
Sininger, Y. S., Grimes, A. M., & Christensen, E. (2010) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/aud.0b013e3181c8e7b6 · Cited by 259
Learning Theories and Education: Toward a Decade of Synergy
Bransford, J. D., Stevens, R., Schwartz, D., Meltzoff, A., Pea, R. D., Roschelle, J., Vye, N. J., Kuhl, P., Bell, P., Barron, B., et al. (2015) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9780203874790.ch10 · Cited by 247
Self-citationPERCEIVING VOWELS IN A SECOND LANGUAGE
Flege, J. E., & MacKay, I. R. A. (2004) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263104026117 · Cited by 238
Multimodal Language Analysis with Recurrent Multistage Fusion
Liang, P. P., Liu, Z., Bagher Zadeh, A., & Morency, L.-P. (2018) · Proceedings of the 2018 Conference on Empirical Methods in Natural Language Processing · doi:10.18653/v1/d18-1014 · Cited by 230
Phan, M. L., Pytte, C. L., & Vicario, D. S. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0510136103 · Cited by 229
fMRI Evidence for Cortical Modification during Learning of Mandarin Lexical Tone
Wang, Y., Sereno, J. A., Jongman, A., & Hirsch, J. (2003) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/089892903770007407 · Cited by 223
The developmental course of lexical tone perception in the first year of life
Mattock, K., Molnar, M. T., Polka, L., & Burnham, D. K. (2007) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2007.07.002 · Cited by 209
Emmanuel Dupoux, A. (2018) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2017.11.008 · Cited by 228
The Neuroscience of Intelligence
Haier, R. J. (2016) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781316105771 · Cited by 209
Phonological Grammar Shapes the Auditory Cortex: A Functional Magnetic Resonance Imaging Study
Jacquemot, C., Pallier, C., Bihan, D. L., Dehaene, S., & Emmanuel Dupoux, A. (2003) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.23-29-09541.2003 · Cited by 197
A new model of sensorimotor coupling in the development of speech
Westermann, G., & Miranda, E. R. (2003) · Brain and Language · doi:10.1016/s0093-934x(03)00345-6 · Cited by 197
Areal Sound Patterns: From Perceptual Magnets to Stone Soup
Blevins, J. (2017) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781107279872.006 · Cited by 196
Bilingual language processing: A meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies
Sulpizio, S., Maschio, N. D., Fedeli, D., & Abutalebi, J. (2019) · Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews · doi:10.1016/j.neubiorev.2019.12.014 · Cited by 207
Reinterpreting loanword adaptations: the role of perception
Sharon Peperkamp, A., & Emmanuel Dupoux, A. (2003) · Cited by 185
Arnon, I., & Ramscar, M. (2011) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2011.10.009 · Cited by 180
Jia, G., Strange, W., Wu, Y., Collado, J., & Guan, Q. (2006) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.2151806 · Cited by 158
Earlier Speech Exposure Does Not Accelerate Speech Acquisition
Peña, M., Werker, J. F., & Dehaene‐Lambertz, G. (2012) · Journal of Neuroscience · doi:10.1523/jneurosci.6516-11.2012 · Cited by 170
Meyer, L., Sun, Y., & Martin, A. E. (2019) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2019.1693050 · Cited by 156
Differential maturation of brain signal complexity in the human auditory and visual system
Lippé, S. (2009) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/neuro.09.048.2009 · Cited by 173
The influence of meaning on the perception of speech sounds
Kazanina, N., Phillips, C., & Idsardi, W. J. (2006) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0604821103 · Cited by 159
Investigating the role of infant-directed speech with a computer model
de Boer, B., & Kuhl, P. K. (2003) · Acoustics Research Letters Online · doi:10.1121/1.1613311 · Cited by 154
Self-citationLuk, Z. P., & Shirai, Y. (2009) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2009.00524.x · Cited by 150
Near‐term fetuses process temporal features of speech
Granier‐Deferre, C., Ribeiro, A., Jacquet, A.-Y., & Bassereau, S. (2010) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00978.x · Cited by 148
REEXAMINING EFFECTS OF FORM-FOCUSED INSTRUCTION ON L2 PRONUNCIATION DEVELOPMENT
Saito, K. (2012) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263112000666 · Cited by 156
Invariance detection within an interactive system: A perceptual gateway to language development.
Gogate, L. J., & Hollich, G. J. (2010) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/a0019049 · Cited by 142
Syntax production in bilinguals
Golestani, N., Alario, F. ‐., Mériaux, S., Bihan, D. L., Dehaene, S., & Pallier, C. (2006) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2005.11.009 · Cited by 142
Bent, T., Bradlow, A. R., & Wright, B. A. (2006) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037/0096-1523.32.1.97 · Cited by 137
On the perceptual origin of loanword adaptations: experimental evidence from Japanese
Sharon Peperkamp, A., Vendelin, I., & Nakamura, K. (2008) · Phonology · doi:10.1017/s0952675708001425 · Cited by 136
Neural Correlates for the Acquisition of Natural Language Syntax
Tettamanti, M., Alkadhi, H., Moro, A., Perani, D., Kollias, S., & Weniger, D. (2002) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1006/nimg.2002.1201 · Cited by 136
Form is easy, meaning is hard: resolving a paradox in early child language
Naigles, L. (2002) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/s0010-0277(02)00177-4 · Cited by 135
THE EFFECTS OF CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK ON INSTRUCTED L2 SPEECH PERCEPTION
Lee, A. H., & Lyster, R. (2016) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263115000194 · Cited by 133
How does Place fall into place?
Fikkert, P., & Levelt, C. C. (2008) · doi:10.1515/9783110208603.3.231 · Cited by 132
Auditory Cortical Detection and Discrimination Correlates with Communicative Significance
Liu, R. C., & Schreiner, C. E. (2007) · PLoS Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.0050173 · Cited by 130
Event-related potentials associated with second language learning in children
Шестакова, А. Н., Huotilainen, M., Čeponien≐, R., & Marie Cheour, C. (2003) · Clinical Neurophysiology · doi:10.1016/s1388-2457(03)00134-2 · Cited by 130
Magnetic Brain Response Mirrors Extraction of Phonological Features from Spoken Vowels
Obleser, J., Lahiri, A., & Eulitz, C. (2004) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/089892904322755539 · Cited by 129
Sebastián‐Gallés, N., & Bosch, L. (2009) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2009.00829.x · Cited by 138
Infant-directed speech facilitates seven-month-old infants’ cortical tracking of speech
Kalashnikova, M., Peter, V., Liberto, G. M. D., Lalor, E. C., & Burnham, D. K. (2018) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-32150-6 · Cited by 122
Morphological Congruency and the Acquisition of L2 Morphemes
Jiang, N., Novokshanova, E., Masuda, K., & Wang, X. (2011) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-9922.2010.00627.x · Cited by 120
You'll see what you mean: Students encode equations based on their knowledge of arithmetic
MCNEIL, N., & Alibali, M. W. (2004) · Cognitive Science · doi:10.1016/j.cogsci.2003.11.002 · Cited by 120
Limits on bilingualism revisited: Stress ‘deafness’ in simultaneous French–Spanish bilinguals
Emmanuel Dupoux, A., Sharon Peperkamp, A., & Sebastián‐Gallés, N. (2009) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2009.10.001 · Cited by 119
Indeterminacy in language acquisition: the role of child directed speech and joint attention
Dominey, P. F., & Dodane, C. (2003) · Journal of Neurolinguistics · doi:10.1016/s0911-6044(03)00056-3 · Cited by 129
The perception of handshapes in American Sign Language
Baker, S. A., Idsardi, W. J., Golinkoff, R. M., & Petitto, L. (2005) · Memory & Cognition · doi:10.3758/bf03193083 · Cited by 117
Auditory temporal resolution in birds: Discrimination of harmonic complexes
Dooling, R. J., Leek, M. R., Gleich, O., & Dent, M. L. (2002) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.1494447 · Cited by 116
The linguistic perception of SIMILAR L2 sounds
Escudero, P. (2009) · Mouton eBooks · doi:10.1515/9783110219234.151 · Cited by 115
Computational Investigations of Multiword Chunks in Language Learning
McCauley, S. M., & Christiansen, M. H. (2017) · Topics in Cognitive Science · doi:10.1111/tops.12258 · Cited by 116
Distinct brain representations for early and late learned words
Fiebach, C. J., Friederici, A. D., Müller, K., von Cramon, D. Y., & Hernández, A. E. (2003) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00227-1 · Cited by 111
Common Neural Basis for Phoneme Processing in Infants and Adults
Dehaene‐Lambertz, G., & Gliga, T. (2004) · Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1162/0898929042304714 · Cited by 120
Absolute Pitch--Functional Evidence of Speech-Relevant Auditory Acuity
Oechslin, M. S., Meyer, M. E., & Jäncke, L. (2009) · Cerebral Cortex · doi:10.1093/cercor/bhp113 · Cited by 117
At 11 months, prosody still outranks statistics
Johnson, E. K., & Seidl, A. H. (2008) · Developmental Science · doi:10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00740.x · Cited by 107
Lengeris, Α., & Hazan, V. L. (2010) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.3506351 · Cited by 105
Specialization of primary auditory cortex processing by sound exposure in the “critical period”
Nakahara, H., Zhang, L. I., & Merzenich, M. M. (2004) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.0401196101 · Cited by 104
Perception and production of French close and close-mid rounded vowels by Japanese-speaking learners
Kamiyama, T., & Vaissière, J. (2009) · Acquisition et interaction en langue étrangère · doi:10.4000/aile.4533 · Cited by 103
Supervised and unsupervised learning of multidimensional acoustic categories.
Goudbeek, M. B., Swingley, D., & Smits, R. (2009) · Journal of Experimental Psychology Human Perception & Performance · doi:10.1037/a0015781 · Cited by 101
Early learners’ discrimination of second-language vowels
Højen, A., & Flege, J. E. (2006) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.2184289 · Cited by 100
Archila‐Suerte, P., Zevin, J. D., Bunta, F., & Hernández, A. E. (2011) · Bilingualism Language and Cognition · doi:10.1017/s1366728911000125 · Cited by 100
How can multimodal cues from child-directed interaction reduce learning complexity in robots?
Rohlfing, K. J., Fritsch, J., Wrede, B., & Jungmann, T. (2006) · Advanced Robotics · doi:10.1163/156855306778522532 · Cited by 99
The Nature and Development of Critical-Analytic Thinking
Byrnes, J. P., & Dunbar, K. N. (2014) · Educational Psychology Review · doi:10.1007/s10648-014-9284-0 · Cited by 107
Lee, B., Guion, S. G., & Harada, T. (2006) · Studies in Second Language Acquisition · doi:10.1017/s0272263106060207 · Cited by 96
Metadata
- Authors
- Kuhl, P. K.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- Corresponding author
- Kuhl, Patricia K.
- ORCID
- Kuhl, Patricia K.
- Venue
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
- Publisher
- National Academy of Sciences
- Published
- 2000-10-24
- Volume
- 97
- Issue
- 22
- Pages
- 11850-11857
- ISSN
- 0027-8424 (ISSN-L)
- 1091-6490
- PMC
- PMC34178
- OpenAlex
- W1972159947
- Semantic Scholar
- 4ea6e708012a19bcd4674f1607fd1e1a03b93eaf
- Cited by
- 773
- References
- 121
- Citations by year
- 2026: 12 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 21 · 2023: 36 · 2022: 31 · 2021: 45 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 45 · 2017: 34 · 2016: 31 · 2015: 53 · 2014: 32 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 34
- FWCI
- 42.58
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
- Locations
- Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (publishedVersion)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institutes of Health (HD 37954)
- Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (R01HD037954, HD37954)
- 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 › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
- Keywords
- language acquisition, infant speech perception, statistical learning, perceptual mapping, language experience, language bootstrapping, infant language development
- MeSH terms
- Animals, Haplorhini, Humans, Infant, Language Development
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.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
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
