MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Earlier Speech Exposure Does Not Accelerate Speech Acquisition

2012· article· en· W2114647703 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Neuroscience · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDuration (music)PsychologyAudiologyTerm (time)Developmental psychologyMedicineAcoustics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Critical periods in language acquisition have been discussed primarily with reference to studies of people who are deaf or bilingual. Here, we provide evidence on the opening of sensitivity to the linguistic environment by studying the response to a change of phoneme at a native and nonnative phonetic boundary in full-term and preterm human infants using event-related potentials. Full-term infants show a decline in their discrimination of nonnative phonetic contrasts between 9 and 12 months of age. Because the womb is a high-frequency filter, many phonemes are strongly degraded in utero. Preterm infants thus benefit from earlier and richer exposure to broadcast speech. We find that preterms do not take advantage of this enriched linguistic environment: the decrease in amplitude of the mismatch response to a nonnative change of phoneme at the end of the first year of life was dependent on maturational age and not on the duration of exposure to broadcast speech. The shaping of phonological representations by the environment is thus strongly constrained by brain maturation factors.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.789
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.315
Teacher spread0.280 · 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