ArticleLanguage learning and development : the official journal of the Society for Language Development2021
Practice and experience predict coarticulation in child speech.
Article in Language learning and development : the official journal of the Society for Language Development, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- How infants learn (to walk): Transitions are a fundamental component of practice.Developmental psychology · 2026Article
- Individual Differences in the Development of Gendered Speech in Preschool Children: Evidence From a Longitudinal Study.Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR · 2022Article
- Auditory feedback experience in the development of phonetic production: Evidence from preschoolers with cochlear implants and their normal-hearing peers.The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2021Article
- Effects of Device Limitations on Acquisition of the /t/-/k/ Contrast in Children With Cochlear Implants.Ear and hearingArticle
- Exploring perception of coarticulatory cues in childhood apraxia of speech and residual speech sound disorders: A pilot study.Journal of communication disordersArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Much research in child speech development suggests that young children coarticulate more than adults. There are multiple, not mutually-exclusive, explanations for this pattern. For example, children may coarticulate more because they are limited by immature motor control. Or they may coarticulate more if they initially represent phonological segments in larger, more holistic units such as syllables or feet. We tested the importance of several different explanations for coarticulation in child speech by evaluating how four-year-olds' language experience, speech practice, and speech planning predicted their coarticulation between adjacent segments in real words and paired nonwords. Children with larger vocabularies coarticulated less, especially in real words, though there were no reliable coarticulatory differences between real words and nonwords after controlling for word duration. Children who vocalized more throughout a daylong audio recording also coarticulated less. Quantity of child vocalizations was more predictive of the degree of children's coarticulation than a measure of receptive language experience, adult word count. Overall, these results suggest strong roles for children's phonological representations and speech practice, as well as their immature fine motor control, for coarticulatory development.
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.