Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 308

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Infants' Listening Preferences: Baby Talk or Happy Talk?

Singh, Leher, Morgan, James L., Best, Catherine T.·2002·Infancy

Abstract

The most robust finding on infants' listening preferences has been widely characterized as a preference for baby talk (BT) over adult‐directed speech (ADS). Although prosodic modifications characteristic of BT also convey positive affect, differences in affect across BT and ADS speech registers have not been controlled in previous studies. This set of experiments sought to elucidate the basis for 6‐month‐olds' listening preference by independently manipulating affect and speech register. When affect was held constant, no preference for any speech register was observed. Moreover, when ADS stimuli presented more positive affect than BT stimuli, infants' preferences followed the positive affect. Higher and more variable pitch was neither necessary nor sufficient for determining infants' preferences, although pitch characteristics may modulate affect‐based preferences. The BT preference is thus attributable to a more general preference for speech that imparts relatively positive affect, a preference perhaps ascribable to a preexisting general‐purpose mechanism opportunistically exploited by language.

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 · 10.1207/s15327078in0303_5

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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

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

Cites

Cited by

See all 308

Metadata

Authors
Singh, L., Morgan, J. L., & Best, C. T.
Venue
Infancy
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2002-07
Volume
3
Issue
3
Pages
365-394
ISSN
  • 1525-0008 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7078
OpenAlex
W2114613283
Cited by
308
References
6
FWCI
5.95
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.