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 401–500 of 769
Lovčević, I., & Tsuji, S. (2024) · Infant Behavior and Development · doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2024.101977 · Cited by 5
Inglese, M. D. (2008) · Cited by 5
Understanding the Diverse Literacy Needs of Profoundly Deaf Sign-Dominant Adults in Australia
Furlonger, B., & Rickards, F. (2011) · Reading Psychology · doi:10.1080/02702711.2010.495637 · Cited by 5
Feiden, J. A., Alves, U. K., & Finger, I. (2014) · Letras de Hoje · doi:10.15448/1984-7726.2014.1.14715 · Cited by 5
Behavioral vs. cognitive views of speech perception and production.
Schlinger, H. D. (2010) · The Journal of Speech and Language Pathology – Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1037/h0100271 · Cited by 5
Kane, J. B., & Lam, C. B. (2010) · National symposium on family issues · doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-7361-0_17 · Cited by 5
Phonetics: A Practical Introduction
Wayland, R. P. (2019) · Cited by 5
Bakhos, D., Delage, H., Galvin, J. J., Lescanne, E., Roux, S., Bonnet‐Brilhault, F., & Bruneau, N. (2014) · BioMed Research International · doi:10.1155/2014/198153 · Cited by 5
Understanding the Language of Information Literacy
Orgeron, J.-P. (2017) · The Journal of Academic Librarianship · doi:10.1016/j.acalib.2017.10.004 · Cited by 5
Evidence for [Coronal] Underspecification in Typical and Atypical Phonological Development
Cummings, A. E., Ogiela, D. A., & Wu, Y. C. (2020) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2020.580697 · Cited by 5
Perception of foreign segments in loanword phonology
Kim, J. (2021) · Lingua · doi:10.1016/j.lingua.2021.103160 · Cited by 5
Benarous, X., & Cohen, D. (2015) · L Encéphale · doi:10.1016/j.encep.2015.06.002 · Cited by 6
O’Neill, B., Bennet, J., & Vanier, C. (2010) · Cited by 5
La reconnaissance des visages par le nourrisson
Gliga, T. (2003) · Médecine & enfance · Cited by 5
Lengeris, Α., & Nicolaidis, K. (2014) · Interspeech (USB) · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2014-131 · Cited by 5
Brain plasticity and phonetic training for English-as-a-second-language learners
Zhang, Y., & Cheng, B. (2011) · Cited by 5
Cortical representations for phonological quantity
Ylinen, S. (2006) · Työväentutkimus Vuosikirja · Cited by 5
“The Bridge Between Cuba and Me”: The Experiences of Bilingual AfroLatiné Music Education Students
Regus, M. (2025) · Journal of Research in Music Education · doi:10.1177/00224294251318048 · Cited by 5
Individual Differences in Statistical Learning and Semantic Adaptation: An N400 Study
Munding, M., Forgács, B., Lukics, K. S., & Lukács, Á. (2025) · Psychophysiology · doi:10.1111/psyp.70125 · Cited by 4
Daikoku, T., & Goswami, U. (2025) · Neurobiology of Language · doi:10.1162/nol.a.226 · Cited by 4
Netto, W. F. (2016) · doi:10.4322/978-85-99829-84-4 · Cited by 4
Petek, K. J. (2014) · ELOPE English Language Overseas Perspectives and Enquiries · doi:10.4312/elope.11.1.45-64 · Cited by 4
Shollenbarger, A. J., Robinson, G. C., Taran, V. L., & Choi, S. (2017) · Language Speech and Hearing Services in Schools · doi:10.1044/2017_lshss-16-0062 · Cited by 4
Kajouj, F., & Kager, R. (2017) · International Journal of Bilingualism · doi:10.1177/1367006917745696 · Cited by 4
VOGT, P. R. (2019) · Landscape Ecology · doi:10.1007/s10980-019-00797-9 · Cited by 4
Audiovisual English /r/−/l/ Identification Training for Japanese-Speaking Adults and Children
Shinohara, Y. (2021) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2021_jslhr-20-00506 · Cited by 4
Canary Vocal Sensorimotor Model with RNN Decoder and Low-dimensional GAN Generator
Pagliarini, S., Leblois, A., & Hinaut, X. (2021) · IEEE International Conference on Development and Learning (ICDL) · doi:10.1109/icdl49984.2021.9515607 · Cited by 4
Electrophysiological responses of audiovisual integration from infancy to adulthood
Vannasing, P., Dionne-Dostie, E., Tremblay, J., Paquette, N., Collignon, O., & Gallagher, A. (2024) · Brain and Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.bandc.2024.106180 · Cited by 4
The case for case-based automatic speech recognition
Maier, V., & Moore, R. K. (2009) · Interspeech (USB) · doi:10.21437/interspeech.2009-560 · Cited by 4
Neuroscience and Bilingualism: Effects of the Mother Tongue
Rico, U. D. P., Álvarez-Pérez, H. J., & Díaz-Sánchez, G. (2013) · Educación y Educadores · doi:10.5294/edu.2013.16.2.1 · Cited by 4
Miniature natural language learning in L2 acquisition research
Kempe, V., & Brooks, P. J. (2016) · Bilingual processing and acquisition · doi:10.1075/bpa.3.03kem · Cited by 5
Top-Down Predictions of Familiarity and Congruency in Audio-Visual Speech Perception at Neural Level
Kolozsvári, O., Xu, W., Leppänen, P. H. T., & Hämäläinen, J. A. (2019) · Frontiers in Human Neuroscience · doi:10.3389/fnhum.2019.00243 · Cited by 4
Understanding and Studying Internet Culture by the Tool of Internet Language
Chen, F., Li, Q., & Yao, H. (2022) · Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research/Advances in social science, education and humanities research · doi:10.2991/assehr.k.220131.189 · Cited by 4
Mimicking Infants’ Bilingual Language Acquisition for Domain Specialized Neural Machine Translation
Park, C., Go, W., Eo, S., Moon, H., Lee, S., & Lim, H. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3165572 · Cited by 4
The perception and production of palatal codas by Korean L2 learners of English
Huensch, A. (2013) · Illinois Digital Environment for Access to Learning and Scholarship (University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign) · Cited by 4
Estratégias prosódicas da leitura em voz alta e da fala espontânea
Netto, W. F., & Consoni, F. (2008) · Alfa · Cited by 4
Perception-based vowel insertion by native Spanish-speaking learners of English
Gibson, M. (2012) · TIPA Travaux interdisciplinaires sur la parole et le langage · doi:10.4000/tipa.205 · Cited by 4
MOTHERS AND THEIR OFFSPRING PERCEIVE THE TRITONE PARADOX IN CLOSELY SIMILAR WAYS
Deutsch, D. (2007) · Cited by 4
Speech Development: Toddlers Don't Mind Getting It Wrong
Messum, P., & Howard, I. S. (2012) · Current Biology · doi:10.1016/j.cub.2012.01.032 · Cited by 4
A Framework for Self-Regulated Project-Based Learning in Higher Education
Zarouk, M. Y., Restivo, F., & Khaldi, M. (2019) · Educational and Social Dimensions of Digital Transformation in Organizations · doi:10.4018/978-1-5225-6261-0.ch010 · Cited by 1
Investigating Native English Speakers’ Perception of Novel Arabic Phonemes after First Exposure
Alwohaibi, H. (2019) · Arab World English Journal · doi:10.2139/ssrn.3451447 · Cited by 4
Second language acquisition and the national curriculum
Dampier, G. (2015) · Journal for Language Teaching · doi:10.4314/jlt.v48i2.2 · Cited by 4
Demir, Y. (2014) · Mediterranean Journal of Humanities · doi:10.13114/mjh.201416428 · Cited by 4
Don’t teach me 2 + 2 equals 4: Knowledge of arithmetic operations hinders equation learning
McNeil, N. M. (2004) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 4
Neural correlates of fricative contrasts across language boundaries
Lipski, S. C. (2006) · OPUS Publication Server of the University of Stuttgart (University of Stuttgart) · doi:10.18419/opus-2595 · Cited by 4
Tateishi, M. (2013) · Libraries and Cultural Resources (University of Calgary) · doi:10.5072/prism/25835 · Cited by 4
Unsupervised multimodal neural networks
Nyamapfene, A. (2006) · Surrey Research Insight Open Access (The University of Surrey) · Cited by 4
Language Development: Overview
Blinkoff, E., Levine, D., Avelar, D., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh‐Pasek, K. (2019) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-809324-5.23578-5 · Cited by 4
Jentschke, S. (2007) · Max Planck Digital Library · Cited by 4
Important issues in the care and evaluation of bilingual/multilingual children
Chavda, U., Kao, R., Soldatou, A., Gardner, A. W., Knudson, P., Su, H., Eberly, S. S., & Dyke, D. C. V. (2003) · International pediatrics · Cited by 4
Lukács, Á., Ugrin, B. J., & Lukics, K. S. (2025) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106356 · Cited by 3
Bilinguals' Semantic Transfer Across Languages
Hancı-Azizoğlu, E. B. (2022) · Advances in religious and cultural studies (ARCS) book series · doi:10.4018/978-1-7998-8985-4.ch001 · Cited by 3
How the perception of events in children is influenced by language
Golinkoff, R. M., Katz, S., Jo, J., Singh, L., Collins, M. A., & Hirsh‐Pasek, K. (2025) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/j.cognition.2025.106123 · Cited by 3
Sensitive periods for language and recovery from stroke: Conceptual and practical parallels
Zevin, J. D., Datta, H., & Skipper, J. I. (2012) · Developmental Psychobiology · doi:10.1002/dev.20626 · Cited by 3
Our Biological Mind in the Modern Verbal World
Orians, G. H. (2018) · Studies in applied philosophy, epistemology and rational ethics · doi:10.1007/978-3-319-91277-6_1 · Cited by 3
Neural Underpinnings of Early Speech Perception and Emergent Literacy
Lee, C. (2019) · Folia Phoniatrica et Logopaedica · doi:10.1159/000497058 · Cited by 3
Understanding language acquisition: Neural theory of language
Aktan‐Erciyes, A. (2021) · Journal of Language and Linguistic Studies · doi:10.52462/jlls.48 · Cited by 3
Matsui, T., Uchida, M., Fujino, H., Tojo, Y., & Hakarino, K. (2021) · Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics · doi:10.1080/02699206.2021.1947385 · Cited by 3
Burunat, E. (2015) · Advances in Anthropology · doi:10.4236/aa.2015.52008 · Cited by 3
Lexical Storage versus Online Construction
Jackendoff, R. S. (2002) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.003.0006 · Cited by 3
Phoneme acquisition: Infants and second language learners
Jensen, J. (2011) · The Language Teacher · doi:10.37546/jalttlt35.6-4 · Cited by 3
Ćavar, M. E., & Lulich, S. M. (2021) · Phonological Data and Analysis · doi:10.3765/pda.v3art3.31 · Cited by 3
Challenges in the perception of L2 English phonemes by native speakers of Cypriot Greek
Kkese, E. T., & Karpava, S. (2021) · Journal of Monolingual and Bilingual Speech · doi:10.1558/jmbs.15362 · Cited by 3
Discovering the Neuroanatomical Correlates of Music with Machine Learning
Daikoku, T. (2021) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72116-9_6 · Cited by 3
Kalaivanan, K., Sumartono, F., & Tan, Y. (2022) · Journal of Monolingual and Bilingual Speech · doi:10.1558/jmbs.19174 · Cited by 3
Alharbi, J. M. (2024) · Theory and Practice in Language Studies · doi:10.17507/tpls.1401.21 · Cited by 4
FREQUENCY EFFECTS ON THE INTELLIGIBILITY OF ENGLISH WORDS WITH HIGH FRONT VOWELS
Gonçalves, A. R., & Silveira, R. (2015) · Organon · doi:10.22456/2238-8915.52584 · Cited by 3
G.H. Mead's Understanding of the Nature of Speech in the Light of Contemporary Research
GALLAGHER, T. J. (2011) · Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour · doi:10.1111/j.1468-5914.2011.00476.x · Cited by 3
Durational correlates of Japanese phonemic quantity contrasts by Cantonese-speaking L2 learners
Lee, A., & Mok, P. (2016) · Speech prosody · doi:10.21437/speechprosody.2016-122 · Cited by 3
Jackendoff, R. S. (2002) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.003.0010 · Cited by 3
An Evolutionary Perspective on the Architecture
Jackendoff, R. S. (2002) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198270126.003.0008 · Cited by 3
An acoustic, historical, and developmental analysis of Sarikol Tajik diphthongs
Arlund, P. S. (2007) · UTA ResearchCommons (University of Texas Arlington) · Cited by 3
Acoustic Cues to Speech Segmentation in Spoken French: Native and Nonnative Strategies
Shoemaker, E. M. (2009) · Cited by 3
The Production of English Sounds by Early Learners with Different English Learning Experience
ShinSook, L., Lim, I., 고현숙, & Joh, J. (2011) · Korean Journal of Linguistics · doi:10.18855/lisoko.2011.36.1.010 · Cited by 3
Frequencies in Perception and Production Differentially Affect Child Speech
Richtsmeier, P. T., & Good, A. K. (2018) · Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research · doi:10.1044/2018_jslhr-s-17-0391 · Cited by 3
Aspects of articulatory and perceptual learning in novel phoneme acquisition
Cibelli, E. S. (2015) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 3
The role of orienting attention for learning novel phonetic categories
Guion, S. G., & Pederson, E. R. A. (2002) · Scholars' Bank (University of Oregon) · Cited by 3
Sensitivity to changing stimulus distribution characteristics in auditory categorization
Sullivan, S. C., Lotto, A. J., Newlin, E. T., & Diehl, R. L. (2005) · The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · doi:10.1121/1.2040257 · Cited by 3
Contrasting Accounts of Early Speech Perception and Production
Schlinger, H. D. (2023) · Perspectives on Behavior Science · doi:10.1007/s40614-023-00371-4 · Cited by 2
The phonetic underpinnings of phonological specifications
Schwartz, G. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198791126.003.0009 · Cited by 2
Guo, Y., Li, Y., Liu, F., Lin, H. J., Sun, Y., Zhang, J., Hong, Q., Yao, M., & Chi, X. (2024) · BMC Pediatrics · doi:10.1186/s12887-024-04889-7 · Cited by 2
Interbrain coupling during language learning contributes to learning outcomes
Shamay‐Tsoory, S., Markovich, A., Markus, A., & Bitan, T. (2025) · Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience · doi:10.1093/scan/nsaf045 · Cited by 2
The Acquisition of Vowel Normalization during Early Infancy: Theory and Computational Framework
Plummer, A. (2014) · OhioLink ETD Center (Ohio Library and Information Network) · Cited by 2
Chappell, W. (2019) · Journal of Second Language Pronunciation · doi:10.1075/jslp.17034.cha · Cited by 2
Everett, C., & Schwartz, S. (2023) · Linguistic Typology · doi:10.1515/lingty-2022-0033 · Cited by 2
Understanding and Improving Mathematics Instruction Through a Cultural Lens
Ding, M., Huang, R., Li, X., & Li, Y. (2023) · Research in mathematics education · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-35459-5_5 · Cited by 2
Brain and the music: A window to the comprehension of the interactive brain functioning
Andrade, P. E., & Konkiewitz, E. C. (2011) · Ciências & Cognição · Cited by 2
A leitura em língua estrangeira e os efeitos da frequência e da consistência do insumo lexical em L2
Zimmer, M. C. (2010) · Linguagem em (Dis)curso · doi:10.1590/s1518-76322010000100006 · Cited by 2
The structure and content of phonological primitives
Veer, M. V. ’., Botma, B., Breit, F., & van Oostendorp, M. (2023) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oso/9780198791126.003.0001 · Cited by 2
Hu, Q., & Deocampo, M. F. (2024) · The EUrASEANs journal on global socio-economic dynamics · doi:10.35678/2539-5645.1(44).2024.345-353 · Cited by 2
Developmental Predictive Coding Model for Early Infancy Mono and Bilingual Vocal Continual Learning
Chen, X., Pitti, A., Quoy, M., & Chen, N. F. (2024) · Lecture notes in computer science · doi:10.1007/978-3-031-72350-6_2 · Cited by 2
There is no vowel at the end of D O G: Considerations for teaching speech production.
Gerenser, J. (2009) · The Journal of Speech and Language Pathology – Applied Behavior Analysis · doi:10.1037/h0100239 · Cited by 2
Perceptual category mining in human second language speech perception
Lan, Y., & Li, X. (2013) · IEEE International Conference on Signal Processing, Communications and Computing (ICSPCC) · doi:10.1109/icspcc.2013.6664008 · Cited by 2
Templatic features for modeling phoneme acquisition
Emmanuel Dupoux, A., Beraud-Sudreau, G., & Sagayama, S. (2011) · Cited by 2
Pronunciation: intelligibility, frequency considerations, and instruction
Gilner, L., & Morales, F. (2010) · 文京学院大学外国語学部文京学院短期大学紀要 · Cited by 2
Refining the distributional hypothesis: A role for time and context in semantic representation.
Long, C., Dye, M., & Ramscar, M. (2014) · eScholarship (California Digital Library) · Cited by 2
Phonology in Language Learning
Pennington, M. C., & Rogerson‐Revell, P. (2018) · Research and practice in applied linguistics · doi:10.1057/978-1-137-47677-7_2 · Cited by 2
Chu, J., Yang, C., & Guofa, L. I. U. (2019) · Revista de Cercetare si Interventie Sociala · doi:10.33788/rcis.64.25 · Cited by 2
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
