A cross-language comparison of /d /–/ð / perception: Evidence for a new developmental pattern
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Previous studies have shown that infants perceptually differentiate certain non-native contrasts at 6-8 months but not at 10-12 months of age, whereas differentiation is evident at both ages in infants for whom the test contrasts are native. These findings reveal a language-specific bias to be emerging during the first year of life. A developmental decline is not observed for all non-native contrasts, but it has been consistently reported for every contrast in which language effects are observed in adults, In the present study differentiation of English /d-th/ by English- and French-speaking adults and English- and French-learning infants at two ages (6-8 and 10-12 months) was compared using the conditioned headturn procedure. Two findings emerged. First, perceptual differentiation was unaffected by language experience in the first year of life, despite robust evidence of language effects in adulthood. Second, language experience had a facilitative effect on performance after 12 months, whereas performance remained unchanged in the absence of specific language experience. These data are clearly inconsistent with previous studies as well as predictions based on a conceptual framework proposed by Burnham [Appl. Psycholing. 7, 201-240 (1986)]. Factors contributing to these developmental patterns include the acoustic properties of /d-th/, the phonotactic uniqueness of English /th/, and the influence of lexical knowledge on phonetic processing.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it