MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944849916 · doi:10.1017/s1366728919000257

Code-switching in young bilingual toddlers: A longitudinal, cross-language investigation

2019· article· en· W2944849916 on OpenAlexaffabout
Erin Smolak, Stephanie De Anda, Bianka Enriquez, Diane Poulin‐Dubois, Margaret Friend

Bibliographic record

VenueBilingualism Language and Cognition · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersEunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human DevelopmentNational Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders
KeywordsCode-switchingExtant taxonCode (set theory)Neuroscience of multilingualismPsychologyLinguisticsLongitudinal studyDevelopmental psychologyComputer scienceMathematicsProgramming languageSet (abstract data type)StatisticsBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Although there is a body of work investigating code-switching (alternation between two languages in production) in the preschool period, it largely relies on case studies or very small samples. The current work seeks to extend extant research by exploring the development of code-switching longitudinally from 31 to 39 months of age in two distinct groups of bilingual children: Spanish-English children in San Diego and French-English children in Montréal. In two studies, consistent with previous research, children code-switched more often between than within utterances and code-switched more content than function words. Additionally, children code-switched more from Spanish or French to English than the reverse. Importantly, the factors driving the rate of code-switching differed across samples such that exposure was the most important predictor of code-switching in Spanish-English children whereas proficiency was the more important predictor in French-English children.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.306 · 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

Citations39
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBilingualism Language and CognitionSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207