Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40445173›Full record

ArticleChild development

Infants Assume Questions Serve an Information-Seeking Function, Link Them to Interrogative Sentences and Differentiate Them From Assertions.

Cyann Bernard, Adeline Depierreux, Viviane Huet, Olivier Mascaro

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Child development. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

4 authors.

Cyann BernardCNRS, Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0000-8088-1589
Adeline DepierreuxCNRS, Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Viviane HuetCNRS, Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.
Olivier MascaroCNRS, Integrative Neuroscience and Cognition Center, Université Paris Cité, Paris, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1120-5955

Funding

Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-14-ACHN-0020Agence Nationale de la Recherche ANR-21-CE28-0017-01Fondation Fyssen
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Eye-tracking studies tested the understanding of two types of speech acts (questions and assertions) in 14-, 18-, and 30-month-olds (N = 280; 149 females; ethnicity data collection forbidden, testing in 2021-2024). Experiments involved objects either hidden or visible for a speaker. By 14 months, when the speaker asked questions, infants focused on hidden objects (rs > 0.31). Infants linked novel labels in interrogative sentences to hidden objects by 18 months and novel labels in declarative sentences to visible objects by 14 months (ds > 0.52). Thus, infants assume questions seek information one is lacking, while assertions share information one has access to. Furthermore, infants connect interrogative sentences to questions and declarative sentences to assertions, showing an understanding of communicative form-function relations.

Indexed as

Child DevelopmentComprehensionInformation Seeking BehaviorSpeech PerceptionChild, PreschoolEye-Tracking TechnologyFemaleHumansInfantMalecuriositylanguage acquisitionquestionsspeech actstheory of mind

Identifiers

PMID40445173
PMCPMC12379863

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.