ArticleJournal of experimental child psychology2023
Talker variability is not always the right noise: 14 month olds struggle to learn dissimilar word-object pairs under talker variability conditions.
Article in Journal of experimental child psychology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Beyond adult speech: why research on language development should consider speech from children.Child development perspectives · 2026Article
- Linking acoustic variability in the infants' input to their early word production.Developmental science · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Seminal work by Stager & Werker (1997) finds that 14-month-olds can rapidly learn two word-object pairings if the words are distinct (e.g. "neem" and "lif") but not similar (e.g. the minimal pair "bih" and "dih"). More recently, studies have found that adding talker variability during exposure to new word-object pairs lets 14-month-olds succeed on the more challenging minimal pair task, presumably due to talker variability highlighting the "relevant" consistencies between the similar words (Rost & McMurray, 2009; Galle et al., 2015; Hohle et al., 2020). It remains an open question, however, whether talker variability would be similarly useful for learning new word-object pairings when the words themselves are already distinct, or whether instead this extra variability may extinguish learning due to increased task demands. We find evidence for the latter. Namely, in our sample of 54 English-learning 14-month-olds, training infants on two word-object pairings (e.g. "neem" with a dog toy and "lof" with a kitchen tool) only led them to notice when the words and objects were switched if they were trained with single-speaker identical word tokens. When the training featured talker variability (from one or multiple talkers) infants failed to learn the pairings. We suggest that when talker variability is not necessary to highlight the invariant differences between similar words, it may actually increase task difficulty, making it harder for infants to determine what to attend to in the earliest phases of word learning.
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.