Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40066844›Full record

ArticleDevelopmental science2025

When Language Background Does Not Matter: Both Mono- and Bilingual Children Use Mutual Exclusivity and Pragmatic Context to Learn Novel Words.

Natalie Bleijlevens, Anna-Lena Ciesla, Tanya Behne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Developmental science, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing papers in PubMed
–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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

3 authors.

Natalie BleijlevensDepartment of Developmental Psychology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4421-4153
Anna-Lena CieslaDepartment of Developmental Psychology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.
Tanya BehneDepartment of Developmental Psychology, University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7649-4949

Funding

Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft 254142454/GRK 2070
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Do mono- and bilingual children differ in the way they learn novel words in ambiguous settings? Listeners may resolve referential ambiguity by assuming that novel words refer to unknown, rather than known, objects-a response known as the mutual exclusivity effect. Past research suggested that mono- and bilinguals differ with regard to this disambiguation strategy, perhaps because, across languages, bilinguals' experience contradicts one-to-one mappings of label and referent. Another line of research suggested a bilingual advantage in resolving referential ambiguity, based on bilinguals' advanced pragmatic skills. Here, we examine both these claims in a preregistered study with comparable samples of mono- and bilingual 3-year-olds (n = 74) and adults (n = 86). We tested referent disambiguation and retention in two tasks: In the Mutual-Exclusivity task, a speaker used a novel label in the presence of a known and an unknown object. In the Pragmatic task, she used another novel label in the presence of two unknown objects and participants could infer from the pragmatic context that the speaker referred to the object that was new in their discourse. Mono- and bilinguals were equally successful in inferring the correct label-referent links in both tasks and retained them after a delay. These findings indicate that children with different language backgrounds can develop the same strategies and pragmatic skills to learn novel words. Children can use their lexical knowledge and socio-cognitive skills to infer the meanings of novel words, irrespective of whether they are acquiring one or more languages.

Indexed as

LanguageLanguage DevelopmentMultilingualismAdultChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMaleSpeech PerceptionYoung Adultbilingualismcommon grounddisambiguationmutual exclusivitypragmaticsword learning

Identifiers

PMID40066844
PMCPMC11894922

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.