Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42054405›Full record

ArticlePloS one2026

Understanding development of Mainstream US English lexical stress using semi-naturalistic stimuli.

Jill C Thorson, Rachel Courter, Olivia H Dempsey

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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.

Jill C ThorsonDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3136-1752
Rachel CourterDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, United States of America.
Olivia H DempseyDepartment of Communication Sciences and Disorders, University of New Hampshire, Durham, New Hampshire, United States of America.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3877-1228

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Lexical stress-the emphasis placed on syllables within words-is a key feature of spoken language and an important marker for diagnosing speech and language disorders. However, current assessments of prosody, including lexical stress, often rely on reading skills, lack of natural contexts, and have limited clinical utility. To address these challenges, we developed two novel lexical stress (NLS) tasks: (1) a receptive task where participants identified pictures based on the lexical stress of the word, and (2) an expressive task where participants produced target words during a picture description task. Both tasks used familiar multisyllabic words with either trochaic (strong-weak) or iambic (weak-strong) stress patterns. We tested the tasks with 40 neurotypical adults and 15 typically developing children aged 5-11 years who speak mainstream US English. Participants' responses were judged perceptually, and expressive productions were also analyzed acoustically. Results showed that accuracy was higher on the NLS tasks compared to the PEPS-C, likely reflecting the use of familiar words embedded in meaningful contexts that reduce metalinguistic and task-related demands, thereby supporting greater ecological validity. Duration and intensity were the most reliable acoustic cues distinguishing stress patterns, while fundamental frequency (pitch) was less informative. These findings provide initial evidence that the NLS tasks are feasible, developmentally appropriate, and psychometrically promising for assessing lexical stress without literacy demands. By embedding items in meaningful contexts, the tasks may offer a more natural and clinically useful approach to evaluating prosody. Future work will expand testing with younger children and clinical populations.

Indexed as

LanguageSpeechAdultChildChild, PreschoolFemaleHumansMalePhonetics

Identifiers

PMID42054405
PMCPMC13128110

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.