MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4386249498 · doi:10.1167/jov.23.9.5014

Phonemic Discrimination and Eye Movements in Infants

2023· article· en· W4386249498 on OpenAlexaff
Shir Kay, Scott A. Adler

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vision · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStimulus (psychology)Eye movementAmbiguityPsychologyEye trackingCognitive psychologySpeech recognitionAudiologyComputer scienceArtificial intelligenceNeuroscienceMedicine

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction: The ability to discriminate between different phonemes is a crucial part of language development in the first year of life. At the same time that research has shown that language acquisition is a sensitive process that shows narrowing of which phonemes are discriminated in infancy, the paradigms that have been used to study this process have a number of shortcomings. These include temporal resolution, lack of a discriminatory response, and ambiguity of results. To overcome these shortcomings, the present study examined 6-month-old infants’ ability to discriminate between two different phonemes by means of an eye-tracking task, the Visual Expectation Cueing Paradigm (VExCP). Method: In the VExCP, one randomly presented phoneme (paired with a central visual stimulus) predicted a visual target on the right side of a monitor screen and the other randomly presented phoneme predicted a visual target on the left side of the screen or vice versa. The discriminatory phonemes used in the current study were /ma/ and /na/ and infants were exposed to 30 trials of each randomly presented phoneme. If the infants could discriminate between the phonemes, then they would correctly make anticipatory eye movements to the target location at a rate greater than chance. Results: Findings indicated that 6-month-old infants successfully discriminated between the two different phonemes forming an expectation for the phoneme-target location relations and thereby making correct anticipatory eye-movements to the correct target location at a rate greater than chance. Conclusion: The results indicate that the VExCP and eye movements represent a valid paradigm by which to study phonemic discrimination and its development in infancy while overcoming the weaknesses of previously used paradigms.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.200

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.015
GPT teacher head0.354
Teacher spread0.339 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of VisionSame topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207