MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4393086273 · doi:10.1111/desc.13498

Children extract a new linguistic rule more quickly than adults

2024· article· en· W4393086273 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
fundA Canadian funder is recorded on the work.

Bibliographic record

VenueDevelopmental Science · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsAnimacyPsychologyGeneralizationLanguage acquisitionContrast (vision)Rule-based systemCognitive psychologyLinguisticsDevelopmental psychologyArtificial intelligenceComputer scienceMathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children achieve better long-term language outcomes than adults. However, it remains unclear whether children actually learn language more quickly than adults during real-time exposure to input-indicative of true superior language learning abilities-or whether this advantage stems from other factors. To examine this issue, we compared the rate at which children (8-10 years) and adults extracted a novel, hidden linguistic rule, in which novel articles probabilistically predicted the animacy of associated nouns (e.g., "gi lion"). Participants categorized these two-word phrases according to a second, explicitly instructed rule over two sessions, separated by an overnight delay. Both children and adults successfully learned the hidden animacy rule through mere exposure to the phrases, showing slower response times and decreased accuracy to occasional phrases that violated the rule. Critically, sensitivity to the hidden rule emerged much more quickly in children than adults; children showed a processing cost for violation trials from very early on in learning, whereas adults did not show reliable sensitivity to the rule until the second session. Children also showed superior generalization of the hidden animacy rule when asked to classify nonword trials (e.g., "gi badupi") according to the hidden animacy rule. Children and adults showed similar retention of the hidden rule over the delay period. These results provide insight into the nature of the critical period for language, suggesting that children have a true advantage over adults in the rate of implicit language learning. Relative to adults, children more rapidly extract hidden linguistic structures during real-time language exposure. RESEARCH HIGHLIGHTS: Children and adults both succeeded in implicitly learning a novel, uninstructed linguistic rule, based solely on exposure to input. Children learned the novel linguistic rules much more quickly than adults. Children showed better generalization performance than adults when asked to apply the novel rule to nonsense words without semantic content. Results provide insight into the nature of critical period effects in language, indicating that children have an advantage over adults in real-time language learning.

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.

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 categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.805
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.003

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.289 · 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