MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411413398 · doi:10.31234/osf.io/ze73y_v1

Word Learning Seasons: Climate Effects on Early Vocabulary in Monolingual and Bilingual Children

2025· preprint· en· W4411413398 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Laia Fibla, Krista Byers‐Heinlein

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicLanguage Development and Disorders
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsVocabularyAffect (linguistics)Language acquisitionPsychologyCognitionLanguage developmentNeuroscience of multilingualismWord learningVocabulary developmentDevelopmental psychologyLinguisticsCommunication

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Children’s vocabularies reflect the dynamic worlds they inhabit, yet traditional models of language acquisition treat environmental influences as static. This study reveals how seasonal variations in weather systematically influence early vocabulary composition. Three studies involving 16–30 months old monolinguals and bilinguals (total N = 1294), examine how climate conditions affect word learning using parent-reported vocabulary checklists. Children in cold-weather regions (Wisconsin, Montreal) produced significantly more winter-related words compared to peers in milder climates (Texas, Florida), while seasonal analyses showed that within populations, winter word acquisition and knowledge peaked in the coldest months and declined during the warmest months. This pattern was most pronounced in older children, and in bilinguals with greater language exposure. Our research shows how children’s language systems adapt to environmental variations, advancing our understanding of language acquisition as a responsive process shaped by continuous interactions between cognitive development, language exposure, and the changing environmental landscape children navigate.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.019
Threshold uncertainty score0.037

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.285 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicLanguage Development and DisordersFrench-language works237,207