ArticleChild development
Becoming word meaning experts: Infants' processing of familiar words in the context of typical and atypical exemplars.
Article in Child development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phonological representation in English-learning infants' word comprehension.Developmental psychology · 2026Article
- Continuous developmental changes in word recognition and language learning across early childhood.eLife · 2026Article
- Interrogating Early Word Knowledge: Factors That Influence the Alignment Between Caregiver-Report and Experimental Measures.Developmental science · 2026Article
- Object Functions and Words Reexamined: Toddlers' Recognition of Function Depends on Object Type.Journal of cognition and development : official journal of the Cognitive Development Society · 2025Article
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
How do infants become word meaning experts? This registered report investigated the structure of infants' early lexical representations by manipulating the typicality of exemplars from familiar animal categories. 14- to 18-month-old infants (N = 84; 51 female; M = 15.7 months; race/ethnicity: 64% White, 8% Asian, 2% Hispanic, 1% Black, and 23% multiple categories; participating 2022-2023) were tested on their ability to recognize typical and atypical category exemplars after hearing familiar basic-level category labels. Infants robustly recognized both typical (d = 0.79, 95% CI [0.54, 1.03]) and atypical (d = 0.70, 95% CI [0.46, 0.94]) exemplars, with no significant difference between typicality conditions (d = 0.14, 95% CI [-0.08, 0.35]). These results support a broad-to-narrow account of infants' early word meanings. Implications for the role of experience in the development of lexical knowledge are discussed.
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.