Monolingual and bilingual infants rely on the same brain networks: Evidence from resting-state functional connectivity
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This study examines whether bilingual exposure has a profound effect on the functional organization of the developing human brain during infancy. Recent behavioural research attests that monolingual vs. bilingual experience affects cognitive and linguistic processes already during the first months of life. However, to what extent the intrinsic organization of the infant human brain adapts to monolingual vs. bilingual environments is unclear. We measured spontaneous hemodynamic brain activity using functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) in a large cohort (N=99) of 4-month-old monolingual and bilingual infants. We implemented well-established analysis approaches of functional brain imaging that enabled us to reveal the functional organization of the infant brain in large-scale cortical networks, and to perform group-level comparisons (i.e., monolingual vs. bilingual groups) in a reliable manner. Our results revealed no differences between the intrinsic functional organization of the developing monolingual and bilingual infant brain at 4 months of age.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".