Early speech perception and later language development: implications for the “critical period”
Abstract
In this article, we present a summary of recent research linking speech perception in infancy to later language development, as well as a new empirical study examining that linkage. Infant phonetic discrimination is initially language universal, but a decline in phonetic discrimination occurs for nonnative phonemes by the end of the 1st year. Exploiting this transition in phonetic perception between 6 and 12 months of age, we tested the hypothesis that the decline in nonnative phonetic discrimination is associated with native-language phonetic learning. Using a standard behavioral measure of speech discrimination in infants at 7 months and measures of their language abilities at 14, 18, 24, and 30 months, we show (a) a negative correlation between infants' early native and nonnative phonetic discrimination skills and (b) that native- and nonnative-phonetic discrimination skills at 7 months differentially predict future language ability. Better native-language discrimination at 7 months predicts accelerated later language abilities, whereas better nonnative-language discrimination at 7 months predicts reduced later language abilities. The discussion focuses on (a) the theoretical connection between speech perception and language development and (b) the implications of these findings for the putative "critical period" for phonetic learning.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
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?
Learning outcomes from the sensitive period are reliable predictors of individual language skills later in life, such as vocabulary size and grammar skills.
“Converging evidence suggests that the learning outcomes from this period are reliable predictors of individual language skills later in life, such as vocabulary size and grammar skills [1–3].”
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 104 · Cited by 482
- Authors
- Kuhl, P. K., Conboy, B. T., Padden, D., Nelson, T., & Pruitt, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Washington (US)
- ORCID
- Kuhl, Patricia K.
- Venue
- Language Learning and Development
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2005-10
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 3-4
- Pages
- 237-264
- ISSN
- 1547-3341 (ISSN-L)
- 1547-5441
- OpenAlex
- W1984717236
- Cited by
- 482
- References
- 104
- Citations by year
- 2026: 14 · 2025: 24 · 2024: 16 · 2023: 17 · 2022: 70 · 2021: 22 · 2020: 53 · 2019: 20 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 20 · 2016: 23 · 2015: 30 · 2014: 19 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 19
- FWCI
- 19.53
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Language Learning and Development (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- University of Washington
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- National Institutes of Health
- National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Phonetics and Phonology Research
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Reading and Literacy Development
- Keywords
- infant speech perception, phonetic discrimination, critical period hypothesis, language development, phonetic bootstrapping, early language acquisition
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review