Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interaction between a mother and her infant has been described as an intricate ‘dance’ involving coordinated singing and movement (Feldman, 2007). It is widely accepted that infant-directed (ID) speech, characterized as having higher pitch, slower tempo, and exaggerated intonation, is an effective means of communicating with infants and holding their attention (Papousek et al., 1985). Singing is another universally observed caregiving behaviour. Mothers across cultures intuitively use infant-directed (ID) singing to regulate their infants’ emotional state (de l’Etoile, 2006; Nakata & Trehub, 2004). While ID speech and singing appear to be equally successful in regulating infants’ attention (Corbeil, et al., 2013), their effects in modulating infants’ distress are less clear. More precisely, while stress and arousal are intimately connected, there is no research to date that has investigated the efficacy of speech and singing in alleviating infant distress. Using a modified version of the Face-to-Face/Still-Face (FFSF) paradigm (Tronick et al., 1978), the current study is the first to examine 10-month-old infants’ behavioural and physiological responses, via Skin Conductance (SC), to their mother’s singing and speaking. Stress was effectively induced in the still-face episode with infants exhibiting typical “still-face” behaviours and elevated SC responses. The results indicated that in the reunion episode, mother’s singing was more effective in decreasing infant’s physiological arousal, regulating negative affect and promoting infants’ visual attention in comparison to maternal speaking. However, the genre of songs selected (e.g., play song or lullaby) might have been contributed to the positive outcomes of singing in regulating infants’ emotions. Therefore, the second study used the same methodology to examine the effects of maternal play songs and lullabies on infants’ physiological and behavioural responses. The results indicated that maternal play songs were more effective in regulating infants’ stress as well as capturing and maintaining their attention than were soothing lullabies. Taken together, the findings indicate that maternal singing, specifically playful performances, supports infants’ emotions and effectively regulates their stress.
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 | 0.001 |
| 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) | 0.001 | 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".