ArticleComputer speech & language2017
Methods for eliciting, annotating, and analyzing databases for child speech development.
Article in Computer speech & language, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- A Tunable Forced Alignment System Based on Deep Learning: Applications to Child Speech.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2025Article
- Conversation Initiation of Mothers, Fathers, and Toddlers in their Natural Home Environment.Computer speech & language · 2022Article
- Performance of Forced-Alignment Algorithms on Children's Speech.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Methods from automatic speech recognition (ASR), such as segmentation and forced alignment, have facilitated the rapid annotation and analysis of very large adult speech databases and databases of caregiver-infant interaction, enabling advances in speech science that were unimaginable just a few decades ago. This paper centers on two main problems that must be addressed in order to have analogous resources for developing and exploiting databases of young children's speech. The first problem is to understand and appreciate the differences between adult and child speech that cause ASR models developed for adult speech to fail when applied to child speech. These differences include the fact that children's vocal tracts are smaller than those of adult males and also changing rapidly in size and shape over the course of development, leading to between-talker variability across age groups that dwarfs the between-talker differences between adult men and women. Moreover, children do not achieve fully adult-like speech motor control until they are young adults, and their vocabularies and phonological proficiency are developing as well, leading to considerably more within-talker variability as well as more between-talker variability. The second problem then is to determine what annotation schemas and analysis techniques can most usefully capture relevant aspects of this variability. Indeed, standard acoustic characterizations applied to child speech reveal that adult-centered annotation schemas fail to capture phenomena such as the emergence of covert contrasts in children's developing phonological systems, while also revealing children's nonuniform progression toward community speech norms as they acquire the phonological systems of their native languages. Both problems point to the need for more basic research into the growth and development of the articulatory system (as well as of the lexicon and phonological system) that is oriented explicitly toward the construction of age-appropriate computational models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.