CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 283Language Development and DisordersCategorization, perception, and languageLinguistics and Language Studies

How diverse is child language acquisition research?

Open access
Kidd, Evan, Garcia, Rowena·2022·First Language
DOI 10.1177/01427237211066405
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

A comprehensive theory of child language acquisition requires an evidential base that is representative of the typological diversity present in the world’s 7000 or so languages. However, languages are dying at an alarming rate, and the next 50 years represents the last chance we have to document acquisition in many of them. Here, we take stock of the last 45 years of research published in the four main child language acquisition journals: Journal of Child Language, First Language, Language Acquisition and Language Learning and Development. We coded each article for several variables, including (1) participant group (mono vs multilingual), (2) language(s), (3) topic(s) and (4) country of author affiliation, from each journal’s inception until the end of 2020. We found that we have at least one article published on around 103 languages, representing approximately 1.5% of the world’s languages. The distribution of articles was highly skewed towards English and other well-studied Indo-European languages, with the majority of non-Indo-European languages having just one paper. A majority of the papers focused on studies of monolingual children, although papers did not always explicitly report participant group status. The distribution of topics across language categories was more even. The number of articles published on non-Indo-European languages from countries outside of North America and Europe is increasing; however, this increase is driven by research conducted in relatively wealthy countries. Overall, the vast majority of the research was produced in the Global North. We conclude that, despite a proud history of crosslinguistic research, the goals of the discipline need to be recalibrated before we can lay claim to truly a representative account of child language acquisition.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/01427237211066405

Cites

83 of 83 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Kidd, E., & Garcia, R.
Affiliations
  • Australian National University (AU)
  • University of Potsdam (DE)
Corresponding author
Kidd, Evan
ORCID
Venue
First Language
Publisher
SAGE Publications
Published
2022-01-28
Volume
42
Issue
6
Pages
703-735
ISSN
  • 0142-7237 (ISSN-L)
  • 1740-2344
DOI
10.1177/01427237211066405
OpenAlex
W4225079082
Cited by
283
References
83
Citations by year
2026: 49 · 2025: 93 · 2024: 54 · 2023: 54 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 1
FWCI
88.70
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • First Language (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • publish.UP (University of Potsdam) (submittedVersion, cc-by)
  • OSF Preprints (OSF Preprints) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Australian Research Council (CE140100041)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Studies
Keywords
child language acquisition, typological diversity, language documentation, endangered languages, multilingualism, Indo-European languages, Global North bias, research representativeness, linguistic typology

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