MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W2067647862 · doi:10.1121/1.3655069

Temporal characteristics of child-directed speech

2011· article· en· W2067647862 on OpenAlexaff
Eon‐Suk Ko, Mélanie Söderström

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicPhonetics and Phonology Research
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSentenceStress (linguistics)Duration (music)UtteranceSyllableIntonation (linguistics)Focus (optics)Register (sociolinguistics)Speech recognitionComputer scienceSet (abstract data type)LinguisticsPerceptionTask (project management)Speech productionPsychologyNatural language processingAcousticsPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Child-directed speech (CDS) is produced with a slower tempo compared to adult-directed speech (ADS). Yet the characterization of CDS as simply slowly spoken speech masks a number of underlying subtleties. We investigated temporal characteristics of CDS as a function of speech register based on a highly controlled set of elicited data. six sentence forms containing five monosyllabic words were read several times in declarative and question intonation with three focus conditions in CDS and ADS. After an evaluation of the data through a perceptual rating task, 2301 sentences produced by one mother and five theater students were segmented at the word-level using forced-alignment tools (Yuan and Liberman, 2008). We found strong effects of the CDS register on duration across the entire sentence. Additionally, elongation in CDS applied even to the syllables without an explicit focal accent and to function words. Our data also demonstrated a highly consistent ratio of the final syllable to the sentence duration both in CDS and ADS across all subjects. These results suggest that the slow speaking rate in CDS cannot be attributed to any single effect such as the exaggerated utterance-final lengthening (Church etal., 2005) or effects of lexical categories (Swanson etal., 1992).

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.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.305
Teacher spread0.273 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2011
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe Journal of the Acoustical Society of America→Same topicPhonetics and Phonology Research→French-language works237,207→