Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30369005›Full record

ArticleDevelopmental science2019

What Do North American Babies Hear? A large-scale cross-corpus analysis.

Elika Bergelson, Marisa Casillas, Melanie Soderstrom, Amanda Seidl, Anne S Warlaumont, Andrei Amatuni

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Developmental science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 46 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
46citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

46 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Some culture is hiding in plain sight in research on child development.The British journal of developmental psychology · 2026
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Theoretical and Methodological Insights From Five Transcribed and Annotated Daylong Audio Recordings of Young Children's Language Environments.Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science · 2026
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Supporting Early Language by Supporting Systemic Solutions.Policy insights from the behavioral and brain sciences · 2024
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Infants who are rarely spoken to nevertheless understand many words.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2024
    Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Elika BergelsonPsychology & Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.ORCID 0000-0003-2742-4797
Marisa CasillasLanguage Development Department, Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics, Nijmegen, The Netherlands.
Melanie SoderstromPsychology, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada.
Amanda SeidlSpeech, Language, and Hearing Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana.
Anne S WarlaumontCommunication, University of California, Los Angeles, California.
Andrei AmatuniPsychology & Neuroscience, Duke University, Durham, North Carolina.

Funding

Mechanisms of Word Learning in InfancyDP5OD019812 · OD · UNIVERSITY OF ROCHESTER · PI BERGELSON, ELIKA · 2014 to 2018
$1.9M
NIH HHS DP5 OD019812NIH HHS DP5-OD019812
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A range of demographic variables influences how much speech young children hear. However, because studies have used vastly different sampling methods, quantitative comparison of interlocking demographic effects has been nearly impossible, across or within studies. We harnessed a unique collection of existing naturalistic, day-long recordings from 61 homes across four North American cities to examine language input as a function of age, gender, and maternal education. We analyzed adult speech heard by 3- to 20-month-olds who wore audio recorders for an entire day. We annotated speaker gender and speech register (child-directed or adult-directed) for 10,861 utterances from female and male adults in these recordings. Examining age, gender, and maternal education collectively in this ecologically valid dataset, we find several key results. First, the speaker gender imbalance in the input is striking: children heard 2-3× more speech from females than males. Second, children in higher-maternal education homes heard more child-directed speech than those in lower-maternal education homes. Finally, our analyses revealed a previously unreported effect: the proportion of child-directed speech in the input increases with age, due to a decrease in adult-directed speech with age. This large-scale analysis is an important step forward in collectively examining demographic variables that influence early development, made possible by pooled, comparable, day-long recordings of children's language environments. The audio recordings, annotations, and annotation software are readily available for reuse and reanalysis by other researchers.

Indexed as

Language DevelopmentSpeech PerceptionAdultChild, PreschoolDemographyEducational StatusFemaleHumansInfantMaleSex FactorsTape RecordingUnited Statesaddresseechild directed speechgenderlanguage developmentlinguistic inputmaternal education

Identifiers

PMID30369005
PMCPMC6294666

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.