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
Items 301–400 of 769
Kolozsvári, O., Xu, W., Gerike, G., Parviainen, T. M., Nieminen, L., Noiray, A., & Hämäläinen, J. A. (2021) · Neurobiology of Language · doi:10.1162/nol_a_00033 · Cited by 15
Chen, Y., Wong, L. L. N., Zhu, S., & Xi, X. (2016) · Research in Developmental Disabilities · doi:10.1016/j.ridd.2016.10.010 · Cited by 15
Influence of dialect use on speech perception: a mismatch negativity study
Bühler, J. C., Schmid, S., & Maurer, U. (2016) · Language Cognition and Neuroscience · doi:10.1080/23273798.2016.1272704 · Cited by 15
Bühler, J. C., Waßmann, F., Buser, D., Zumberi, F., & Maurer, U. (2017) · Brain Topography · doi:10.1007/s10548-017-0562-2 · Cited by 15
A Computational Model of Infant Speech Development
Howard, I. S., & Messum, P. (2007) · Cited by 15
LSFSL: Leveraging Shape Information in Few-shot Learning
Padmanabhan, D. C., Gowda, S., Arani, E., & Zonooz, B. (2023) · IEEE/CVF Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition Workshops (CVPRW) · doi:10.1109/cvprw59228.2023.00525 · Cited by 14
Motivational intermediaries of self-regulation among university students
Russell, D., & Warner, R. (2017) · Journal of Applied Research in Higher Education · doi:10.1108/jarhe-08-2015-0062 · Cited by 14
On the Role of Cognitive Abilities in Second Language Vowel Learning
Mokari, P. G., & Werner, S. (2018) · Language and Speech · doi:10.1177/0023830918764517 · Cited by 14
Chan, I. L., & Chang, C. B. (2019) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.5120522 · Cited by 14
The development of phonological memory and language: A multiple groups approach
Delcenserie, A., Genesee, F. H., Trudeau, N., & Champoux, F. (2020) · Journal of Child Language · doi:10.1017/s0305000920000343 · Cited by 14
Woolard, A. J., Lane, A. E., Campbell, L., Whalen, O. M., Swaab, L., Karayanidis, F., Barker, D., Murphy, V. E., & Benders, T. (2021) · Review Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders · doi:10.1007/s40489-021-00253-y · Cited by 15
Menn, L., Schmidt, E., & Nicholas, B. (2009) · Language Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.langsci.2008.12.019 · Cited by 14
How learning to abstract shapes neural sound representations
Ley, A., Vroomen, J., & Formisano, E. (2014) · Frontiers in Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnins.2014.00132 · Cited by 14
Bilingual development of theta in a child
Babatsouli, E. (2017) · Poznań Studies in Contemporary Linguistics · doi:10.1515/psicl-2017-0007 · Cited by 14
Georgiou, G. P. (2021) · Language Learning and Development · doi:10.1080/15475441.2021.1977644 · Cited by 14
Shafto, C. L., Havasi, C., & Snedeker, J. (2013) · Developmental Psychology · doi:10.1037/a0034253 · Cited by 14
On the atoms of phonological representation
Vaux, B., & Miller, B. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198791126.003.0002 · Cited by 13
Understanding Children’s Difficulties with Mathematical Equivalence
McNeil, N. M., Hornburg, C. B., Fuhs, M. W., & O’Rear, C. D. (2017) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-805086-6.00008-4 · Cited by 14
Cantonese advantage on English stress perception: Constraints and neural underpinnings
Choi, W. (2021) · Neuropsychologia · doi:10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2021.107888 · Cited by 13
Long-term priors constrain category learning in the context of short-term statistical regularities
Roark, C. L., & Holt, L. L. (2022) · Psychonomic Bulletin & Review · doi:10.3758/s13423-022-02114-z · Cited by 13
Motor constellation theory: A model of infants’ phonological development
Ekström, A. G. (2022) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2022.996894 · Cited by 13
Goudbeek, M. B., Smits, R., Cutler, A., & Swingley, D. (2005) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-008044612-7/50077-9 · Cited by 13
Native Speaker Perceptions of Accented Speech: The English Pronunciation of Macedonian EFL Learners
Киркова-Наскова, А. (2010) · Research in Language · doi:10.2478/v10015-010-0004-7 · Cited by 13
Reason and intuition in the moral life: A dual-process account of moral justification
Saunders, L. F. (2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199230167.003.0015 · Cited by 15
The Role of Affect and Emotion in Language Development
Hohenberger, A. (2011) · IGI Global eBooks · doi:10.4018/978-1-61692-892-6.ch010 · Cited by 13
Development of phonetic complexity in Arabic, Berber, English and French
Gayraud, F., Barkat-Defradas, M., Lahrouchi, M., & Hamed, M. B. (2018) · The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique · doi:10.1017/cnj.2018.9 · Cited by 13
Clark, M. D., Baker, S. K., & Simms, L. E. (2019) · Psychology in the Schools · doi:10.1002/pits.22313 · Cited by 13
Building human-like communicative intelligence: A grounded perspective
Dubova, M. (2021) · Cognitive Systems Research · doi:10.1016/j.cogsys.2021.12.002 · Cited by 15
Automatic Speech Recognition for Non- Native Speakers
Tan, T.-P. (2008) · OpenGrey (Institut de l'Information Scientifique et Technique) · Cited by 13
Aldamen, H. A. K., & Al‐Deaibes, M. (2022) · Ampersand · doi:10.1016/j.amper.2022.100105 · Cited by 12
Phonetics of Early Bilingualism
Amengual, M. (2024) · Annual Review of Linguistics · doi:10.1146/annurev-linguistics-031522-102542 · Cited by 12
Explanation and Constructions: Response to Adger
Goldberg, A. E. (2013) · Mind & Language · doi:10.1111/mila.12028 · Cited by 12
Fast response to human voices in autism
Lin, I.-F., Agus, T. R., Suied, C., Pressnitzer, D., Yamada, T., Komine, Y., Kato, N., & Kashino, M. (2016) · Scientific Reports · doi:10.1038/srep26336 · Cited by 14
Bases cérébrales de l’acquisition du langage : apport de la neuro-imagerie
Dehaene‐Lambertz, G. (2004) · Neuropsychiatrie de l Enfance et de l Adolescence · doi:10.1016/j.neurenf.2004.09.003 · Cited by 12
Constraints on language development Insights from developmental disorders
Thomas, M. S. C. (2005) · BIROn (Birkbeck, University of London) · Cited by 12
Modeling the categorical perception of speech sounds: A step toward biological plausibility
Salminen, N. H., Tiitinen, H., & May, P. (2009) · Cognitive Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience · doi:10.3758/cabn.9.3.304 · Cited by 13
Understanding Auditory Processing Disorder Through the FFR
Schochat, E., Rocha-Muniz, C. N., & Filippini, R. (2017) · Springer handbook of auditory research · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-47944-6_9 · Cited by 12
Acquisition of Japanese quantity contrasts by L1 Cantonese speakers
Lee, A., & Mok, P. (2017) · Second language Research · doi:10.1177/0267658317739056 · Cited by 11
Zhang, H., Ma, W., Ding, H., & Zhang, Y. (2023) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000001341 · Cited by 11
L2 and L3 acquisition of the Portuguese stressed vowel inventory by native speakers of English
Granado, M. D. (2011) · Cited by 11
Pytlyk, C. (2016) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716416000175 · Cited by 11
[Phonetic discrimination ability of a native vowel contrast in preterm infants].
Montiu, M. F., & Galcerán, L. B. (2010) · PubMed · Cited by 11
Is it Too Late Baby? Pinpointing the Emergence of a Black-White Test Score Gap in Infancy
Rippeyoung, P. L. F. (2009) · Sociological Perspectives · doi:10.1525/sop.2009.52.2.235 · Cited by 13
Zarifian, T., Movallali, G., Fotuhi, M., & Harouni, G. G. (2019) · International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology · doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2019.04.016 · Cited by 10
Jorgensen, A. R., Whitehouse, A., Fox, A. M., & Maybery, M. T. (2021) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2021.105709 · Cited by 11
Saito, K., Macmillan, K., Kroeger, S., Magne, V., Takizawa, K., Kachlicka, M., & Tierney, A. T. (2022) · Applied Psycholinguistics · doi:10.1017/s0142716422000029 · Cited by 11
Native language influences on the production of second-language prosody
Kainada, E., & Lengeris, Α. (2015) · Journal of the International Phonetic Association · doi:10.1017/s0025100315000158 · Cited by 10
Spracherwerb und statistisches Lernen
Breitenstein, C., & Knecht, S. (2003) · Der Nervenarzt · doi:10.1007/s00115-002-1466-1 · Cited by 10
Binder, J. R. (2015) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-407794-2.00037-7 · Cited by 10
Fusion and combination in audio-visual integration
Omata, K., & Mogi, K. (2007) · Proceedings of the Royal Society A Mathematical Physical and Engineering Sciences · doi:10.1098/rspa.2007.1910 · Cited by 11
Processing time effects of short-term exposure to foreign-accented English
Clarke, C. M. (2003) · UA Campus Repository (The University of Arizona) · Cited by 10
The Impact of L2 Proficiency on Vowel Training
Wong, J. W. S. (2015) · Palgrave Macmillan UK eBooks · doi:10.1057/9781137509437_10 · Cited by 9
Flaherty, M. M., Browning, J., Buss, E., & Leibold, L. J. (2021) · Ear and Hearing · doi:10.1097/aud.0000000000000979 · Cited by 9
Kemény, F., & Lukács, Á. (2021) · Frontiers in Communication · doi:10.3389/fcomm.2021.700452 · Cited by 9
Fricatives at 18 months as a measure for predicting vocabulary and grammar at 24 and 30 months
Sotto, C. D., Redle, E. E., Bandaranayake, D., Neils‐Strunjas, J., & Creaghead, N. A. (2014) · Journal of Communication Disorders · doi:10.1016/j.jcomdis.2014.02.003 · Cited by 9
Computational and Robotic Models of Early Language Development
Oudeyer, P., Kachergis, G., & Schueller, W. (2019) · Routledge eBooks · doi:10.4324/9781315110622-5 · Cited by 9
Low-level articulatory synthesis: A working text-to-speech solution and a linguistic tool
Hill, D. R., Taube-Schock, C., & Manzara, L. C. (2017) · The Canadian Journal of Linguistics / La revue canadienne de linguistique · doi:10.1017/cnj.2017.15 · Cited by 9
Sensorimotor contingencies in congenital hearing loss: The critical first nine months
Kral, A., Kishon‐Rabin, L., O’Donoghue, G. M., & Romeo, R. R. (2025) · Hearing Research · doi:10.1016/j.heares.2025.109401 · Cited by 9
Παπαχρήστου, Β. Γ. (2017) · Aristotle University of Thessaloniki · doi:10.26262/istal.v19i0.5515 · Cited by 8
Wayland, R. P. (2018) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/9781108289849 · Cited by 8
Shehata-Dieler, W. E., Ehrmann-Müller, D., Wermke, P., Voit, V., Cebulla, M., & Wermke, K. (2013) · Speech Language and Hearing · doi:10.1179/2050571x13z.00000000011 · Cited by 8
Microbiological effects and clinical use of xylitol in preventing acute otitis media
Tapiainen, T. (2002) · Cited by 8
Kayode, O., & Adeyemo, A. A. (2018) · Journal of Otology · doi:10.1016/j.joto.2018.07.001 · Cited by 8
Goldberg, A. E. (2006) · The Psychology of learning and motivation/The psychology of learning and motivation · doi:10.1016/s0079-7421(06)47002-x · Cited by 8
Does infant speech perception predict later vocabulary development in bilingual infants?
Singh, L. (2019) · Journal of Phonetics · doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2019.100914 · Cited by 8
Koyama, S., Akahane-Yamada, R., Gunji, A., Kubo, R., Roberts, T. P. L., Yabe, H., & Kakigi, R. (2003) · NeuroImage · doi:10.1016/s1053-8119(03)00037-5 · Cited by 9
Language Learning Disabilities: Integrating Research Approaches
Labouvie‐Vief, G. (2003) · Cited by 8
Individual differences in second-language vowel learning
Lengeris, Α. (2009) · UCL Discovery (University College London) · Cited by 8
Reification of infant-directed speech? Exploring assumptions shaping infant-directed speech research
Weinstein, N. Y., & Baldwin, D. A. (2022) · Culture & Psychology · doi:10.1177/1354067x221147683 · Cited by 7
Godara, M., Sánchez-López, Á., & Raedt, R. D. (2023) · Behaviour Research and Therapy · doi:10.1016/j.brat.2023.104354 · Cited by 8
Auditory Category Learning in Children With Dyslexia
Roark, C. L., Thakkar, V. J., Chandrasekaran, B., & Centanni, T. M. (2024) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2023_jslhr-23-00361 · Cited by 7
Xu, A., van Niekerk, D. R., Gerazov, B., Krug, P. K., Birkholz, P., Prom–on, S., Halliday, L. F., & Xu, Y. (2024) · Journal of Phonetics · doi:10.1016/j.wocn.2024.101338 · Cited by 7
Acquisition du langage chez l’enfant prématuré durant la première année de vie
Nazzi, T., Nishibayashi, L.-L., Berdasco-Muñoz, E., Baud, O., Biran, V., & Gonzalez-Gomez, N. (2015) · Archives de Pédiatrie · doi:10.1016/j.arcped.2015.07.002 · Cited by 3
Kogan, V. V., & Mora, J. C. (2022) · Laboratory Phonology Journal of the Association for Laboratory Phonology · doi:10.16995/labphon.6431 · Cited by 7
Infants’ Lexical Processing: Independent Contributions of Attentional and Clarity Cues
Lovčević, I., Burnham, D. K., & Kalashnikova, M. (2022) · Language Learning and Development · doi:10.1080/15475441.2022.2149402 · Cited by 7
Modelling vocabulary growth from birth to young adulthood
Moore, R. K., & ten Bosch, L. (2009) · Interspeech · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2009-520 · Cited by 9
Enhancement of Speech-Relevant Auditory Acuity in Absolute Pitch Possessors
Masataka, N. (2011) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2011.00101 · Cited by 7
Early Experience and Sensitive Periods
Knudsen, E. I. (2013) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-385870-2.00021-4 · Cited by 7
Vowel production of Mandarin-speaking hearing aid users with different types of hearing loss
Hung, Y.-C., Lee, Y., & Tsai, L.-C. (2017) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0178588 · Cited by 7
Speech intelligibility problems of Sudanese learners of English: An Experimental approach
Ali, E. M. T. (2017) · Cited by 7
Jacobs, B. (2012) · The Encyclopedia of Applied Linguistics · doi:10.1002/9781405198431.wbeal1039 · Cited by 7
Absolute pitch and related abilities
Dooley, K. (2011) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 7
Enhanced sensitivity to pitch perception and its possible relation to language acquisition in autism
Hisaizumi, M., & Tantam, D. (2024) · Autism & Developmental Language Impairments · doi:10.1177/23969415241248618 · Cited by 7
The contribution of prosody to foreign accent: A study of Spanish as a foreign language
Silva, C. C., & Barbosa, P. A. (2017) · Loquens · doi:10.3989/loquens.2017.041 · Cited by 6
A shared linguistic system of multilingual representations
Slabakova, R. (2023) · Studies in bilingualism · doi:10.1075/sibil.65.02sla · Cited by 6
Spanish–English speech perception in children and adults: Developmental trends
Brice, A. E., Gorman, B. K., & Leung, C. B. (2013) · Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics · doi:10.3109/02699206.2012.757805 · Cited by 6
Tones in Hakka Infant-Directed Speech: An Acoustic Perspective
Cheng, M.-C., & Chang, K.-C. (2014) · Language and Linguistics 語言暨語言學 · doi:10.1177/1606822x14520662 · Cited by 6
Hammes-Ganguly, D., Schrader, D. K., & Martinez, A. S. (2019) · Perspectives of the ASHA Special Interest Groups · doi:10.1044/2018_pers-sig9-2018-0002 · Cited by 5
Early behavioral profiles elucidating vulnerability and resiliency to later ASD outcomes
Landa, R. J., Reetzke, R., Tahseen, M., & Hess, C. R. (2020) · Development and Psychopathology · doi:10.1017/s0954579420000814 · Cited by 6
The impact of older siblings on vocabulary learning in bilingual children
Taylor, K. R., & Kan, P. F. (2018) · International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism · doi:10.1080/13670050.2018.1518969 · Cited by 6
Spatial Release From Masking in Bimodal and Bilateral Pediatric Cochlear Implant Recipients
King, K., Dillon, M. T., O’Connell, B. P., Brown, K. D., & Park, L. R. (2020) · American Journal of Audiology · doi:10.1044/2020_aja-20-00051 · Cited by 6
Pronunciation Instruction : A Review of Methods and Techniques
Gilner, L. (2008) · Institutional Repositories DataBase (IRDB) · Cited by 6
Should It Stay or Should It Go? A Critical Reflection on the Critical Period for Language
Balari, S., & Lorenzo, G. (2015) · Biolinguistics · doi:10.5964/bioling.9027 · Cited by 7
Application of Form-Focused Instruction in English Pronunciation: Examples from Mandarin Learners
Lan, Y., & Wu, M.-J. (2013) · Creative Education · doi:10.4236/ce.2013.49b007 · Cited by 6
The Neurobiology of Structure‐Dependency in Natural Language Grammar
Tettamanti, M., & Perani, D. (2012) · Wiley eBooks · doi:10.1002/9781118432501.ch12 · Cited by 6
Perceptual development of phoneme contrasts in adults and children
Heeren, W. F. L. (2006) · Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) · Cited by 6
The role of vowel hyperarticulation in clear speech to foreigners and infants
Kangatharan, J. (2015) · Brunel University Research Archive (BURA) (Brunel University London) · Cited by 6
Inductive inference in non-native speech processing and learning
Pająk, B. (2012) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 6
Lexical learning shapes the development of speech perception until late adolescencePreprint
Davis, M. H., Evans, S., McCarthy, K. M., Evans, L. M., Giannakopoulou, A., & Taylor, J. S. H. (2019) · doi:10.31234/osf.io/ktsey · Cited by 6
Developing fluency in a language of tactile communication
Tuttle, N., & Hillier, S. (2023) · Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences · doi:10.3389/fresc.2022.1027344 · Cited by 5
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
