Cited by 41Language Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning DevelopmentCategorization, perception, and language

The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.

Toward a Comparative Approach to Language Acquisition

Open access
Christiansen, Morten H., Contreras Kallens, Pablo, Trecca, Fabio·2022·Current Directions in Psychological Science

Abstract

The world’s languages vary in almost every conceivable way, yet children readily learn their native language. Understanding how children can acquire such a diversity of different languages has been a long-standing goal for psychological science, yet current acquisition research is dominated by studies of children learning one particular language: English. In this article, we argue that progress toward this goal will require systematic comparisons between different languages. We propose three levels of comparison: coarse-grained comparisons contrasting unrelated languages to confirm or refute broad theoretical claims, fine-grained comparisons between closely related languages to investigate the impact of specific factors on acquisition outcomes, and within-language comparisons targeting the impact of socio-communicative differences on learning. This three-pronged comparative approach to language acquisition promises to provide new insights into the mechanisms and processes by which children acquire their native tongue under such varied linguistic and socio-communicative conditions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/09637214211049229

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 35 · Cited by 41

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Kidd E., First Language
  2. Plunkett K., 1992, The crosslinguistic study of language acquisition, 3, 457

Metadata

Authors
Christiansen, M. H., Contreras Kallens, P., & Trecca, F.
Affiliations
  • Haskins Laboratories (US)
  • Department of Psychology, Cornell University
  • Aarhus University (DK)
Corresponding author
Christiansen, Morten H.
Venue
Current Directions in Psychological Science
Published
2022-02-23
Volume
31
Issue
2
Pages
131-138
ISSN
  • 0963-7214 (ISSN-L)
  • 1467-8721
OpenAlex
W4213430915
Cited by
41
References
35
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2025: 10 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 6
FWCI
14.46
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
Current Directions in Psychological Science (publishedVersion)
Funders
Det Frie Forskningsråd (DFF-7013-00074)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
Keywords
language acquisition, child language acquisition, linguistic diversity, closely related languages, mother tongue

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