English-Speaking Adults' Labeling of Child- and Adult-Directed Speech Across Languages and Its Relationship to Perception of Affect
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Child-directed speech, as a specialized form of speech directed toward young children, has been found across numerous languages around the world and has been suggested as a universal feature of human experience. However, variation in its implementation and the extent to which it is culturally supported has called its universality into question. Child-directed speech has also been posited to be associated with expression of positive affect or "happy talk." Here, we examined Canadian English-speaking adults' ability to discriminate child-directed from adult-directed speech samples from two dissimilar language/cultural communities; an urban Farsi-speaking population, and a rural, horticulturalist Tseltal Mayan speaking community. We also examined the relationship between participants' addressee classification and ratings of positive affect. Naive raters could successfully classify CDS in Farsi, but only trained raters were successful with the Tseltal Mayan sample. Associations with some affective ratings were found for the Farsi samples, but not reliably for happy speech. These findings point to a complex relationship between perception of affect and CDS, and context-specific effects on the ability to classify CDS across languages.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".