Early Development of the Speech and Gesture System: The Relationship Between Rhythmic Arm Activity and Reduplicated Babble
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The development of the speech-gesture system was examined by evaluating the relationship between rhythmic arm activity (RAA) and reduplicated babble (RB). Using a novel longitudinal observational design, infants were observed in-home weekly, for twelve weeks playing with a rattle (22 to 34 weeks old). Video and audio-recordings were submitted by caregivers via a secure file-sharing service. The design was an effective alternative for longitudinal data collection in infant studies. RAA and RB were positively correlated, and infants exhibited greater amounts of tightly synchronized vocal-manual coordination (VMC) over time. Infant threshold was not a significant predictor of RB or VMC, and babble onset did not significantly predict the frequency or the type of VMC. Trajectory analyses revealed synchronous change across RAA, RB, and VMC. Findings suggest the linkage between RB and RAA is not sequential; but is a simultaneous process representing a moment of re-organization to the maturing speech-gesture system.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".