Search

We conducted a close replication of the seminal work by Marcus and colleagues from 1999, which showed that after a brief auditory exposure phase, 7-month-old infants were able to learn and generalize a rule to novel syllables not previously present in the exposure phase. This work became the foundation for the theoretical framework by which we assume that infants are able to learn abstract representations and generalize linguistic rules. While some extensions on the original work have shown evidence of rule learning, the outcomes are mixed, and an exact replication of Marcus et al.'s study has thus far not been reported. A recent meta-analysis by Rabagliati and colleagues brings to light that the rule-learning effect depends on stimulus type (e.g., meaningfulness, speech vs. nonspeech) and is not as robust as often assumed. In light of the theoretical importance of the issue at stake, it is appropriate and necessary to assess the replicability and robustness of Marcus et al.'s findings. Here we have undertaken a replication across four labs with a large sample of 7-month-old infants (N = 96), using the same exposure patterns (ABA and ABB), methodology (Headturn Preference Paradigm), and original stimuli. As in the original study, we tested the hypothesis that infants are able to learn abstract "algebraic" rules and apply them to novel input. Our results did not replicate the original findings: infants showed no difference in looking time between test patterns consistent or inconsistent with the familiarization pattern they were exposed to.

We present an exact replication of Experiment 2 from Kovács and Mehler's 2009 study, which showed that 7-month-old infants who are raised bilingually exhibit a cognitive advantage. In the experiment, a sound cue, following an AAB or ABB pattern, predicted the appearance of a visual stimulus on the screen. The stimulus appeared on one side of the screen for nine trials and then switched to the other side. In the original experiment, both mono- and bilingual infants anticipated where the visual stimulus would appear during pre-switch trials. However, during post-switch trials, only bilingual children anticipated that the stimulus would appear on the other side of the screen. The authors took this as evidence of a cognitive advantage. Using the exact same materials in combination with novel analysis techniques (Bayesian analyses, mixed effects modeling and cluster based permutation analyses), we assessed the robustness of these findings in four babylabs (N = 98). Our results did not replicate the original findings: although anticipatory looks increased slightly during post-switch trials for both groups, bilingual infants were not better switchers than monolingual infants. After the original experiment, we presented additional trials to examine whether infants associated sound patterns with cued locations, for which we did not find any evidence either. The results highlight the importance of multicenter replications and more fine-grained statistical analyses to better understand child development.

To date, virtually no studies have examined toddlers' non-response in developmental tasks. This study investigates data from 3667 toddlers to address (1) whether two aspects of non-response (completion and engagement) are separable, (2) how stable these aspects are from ages two to three, (3) how non-response relates to background characteristics, and (4) whether non-response at ages two and three predicts early academic skills at age six. Structural equation modelling shows that completion and engagement are separable constructs, relatively stable across age, and related to several background characteristics. Especially engagement predicts later academic performance. Results show that non-response in behavioural tasks in toddlers is not random, increasing the likelihood of sampling bias and lack of generalizability in developmental studies.

Many studies demonstrate that detecting statistical regularities in linguistic input plays a key role in language acquisition. Yet, it is unclear to what extent statistical learning is involved in more naturalistic settings, when young children have to acquire meaningful grammatical elements. In the present study, we address these points, by investigating whether statistical learning is involved in acquiring a morpho-syntactic structure from input that resembles natural languages more closely. We exposed 50 kindergarteners (M = 5 years, 5 months) to a miniature language in which they had to learn a grammatical marker that expressed number, and which could only be acquired on the basis of the distributional properties in the input. Half of the children performed an attention check during the experiment. Results show that young children are able to learn this meaning. We found no clear evidence that facilitating attention to the input increases learning performance.

Research consistently shows that adults engaged in tutored acquisition benefit from explicit instruction in several linguistic domains. For preschool children, it is often assumed that such explicit instruction does not make a difference. In the present study, we investigated whether explicit instruction affected young learners in acquiring a morpho-syntactic element. A total of 103 Dutch-speaking kindergartners (M = 5;7) received training in a miniature language to learn a meaningful agreement marker. Results from a picture matching task, during which eye movements were recorded, provided no evidence that explicit instruction led to higher accuracy rates, but suggest that it did lead to earlier predictive eye movements. These data seem incompatible with the idea that explicit instruction does not make a difference when kindergartners learn a grammatical element, and tentatively suggest that explicit instruction has a different effect on explicit knowledge than on implicit knowledge in this age group.

Many studies suggest that detecting statistical regularities in linguistic input plays a key role in language acquisition. Although statistical learning is not necessarily implicit in nature, it is often defined as learning that happens without awareness. This article investigates whether statistical learning in young children is indeed implicit, as often assumed. We trained 63 kindergarteners on a miniature language and assessed learning using a picture-matching task. We used an opt-out task to measure whether the kindergarteners possessed awareness of an acquired meaningful grammatical marker. In the opt-out paradigm, participants demonstrate awareness by expressing uncertainty through a nonverbal response: opting out. Our results are compatible with an earlier study of which the present study is a partial replication, suggesting that kindergarteners can acquire this marker from distributional properties in the input. Furthermore, although none of the children could verbalize knowledge of the structure during exit interviews, their behavior during the opt-out task indicated that they developed awareness of it.

Providing first language (L1) translations in L2 vocabulary interventions may be beneficial for L2 vocabulary learning. However, in linguistically diverse L2 classrooms, teachers cannot provide L1 translations to all children. Social robots do offer such opportunities, as they can be programmed to speak any combination of languages. This study investigates whether providing L1 translations in a robot-assisted L2 vocabulary training facilitates children's learning. Participants were Turkish-Dutch kindergartners (n = 67) who were taught six Dutch (L2) words for which they knew the L1 (Turkish), but not the L2 Dutch form. Half of these words were taught by a Turkish-Dutch bilingual robot, alongside their Turkish translations; the other half by a monolingual Dutch robot. Children also completed Dutch and Turkish receptive vocabulary tests. Results of generalized linear regression models indicated better performance in the Dutch-only condition than in the Turkish-Dutch condition. Children with well-developed Turkish and Dutch vocabulary knowledge outperformed children with less well-developed vocabulary knowledge. The majority of children preferred working with the bilingual robot, but children's preference did not affect word learning. Thus, contrary to our prediction, we found no evidence for a facilitating effect of providing L1 translations through a robot on bilingual children's L2 word learning.

Background: Morphosyntactic problems are a core symptom of Developmental Language Disorder (DLD). In the Netherlands, children with (presumed) DLD can receive special care in language‐focused treatment groups. The focus of these groups mainly lies in improving communicative intentions, vocabulary and phonology. Morphosyntactic skills receive less attention. Aims: The authors developed a scripted group‐based intervention targeting morphosyntactic skills in young children with DLD. In this study, the effect of the intervention on the morphosyntactic skills of preschoolers with (presumed) DLD was tested and the usability for pedagogical practitioners (PPs) was evaluated. Methods & Procedures: Twenty‐seven preschoolers with DLD (aged 2;10–3;10 [years;months]) participated in an A‐B group study in which the development of grammatical structures was monitored with a morphosyntactic task and language sample analyses (LSA). Progression during 8 weeks usual care (UC) and 8 weeks morphosyntactic intervention was examined using Bayesian mixed effects models. In LSA, structures that were targeted were compared to control structures. The intervention consisted of a weekly script‐based group session in which morphosyntactic structures were targeted, and daily activities in which these target structures were repeated. The intervention was provided by trained PPs, who were coached by a speech‐language therapist. An early indication of usability and feasibility was evaluated using an online questionnaire. Outcomes & Results: The analyses show that morphosyntactic skills improved during the intervention period, with strong evidence for growth in the production of target structures on the morphosyntactic task and target and control structures in LSA, while barely any evidence was found for growth in the use of these structures in UC. However, target structures and control structures seem to develop at the same rate. General measures of morphosyntactic ability showed improvement both during UC and the intervention phase. Evaluation among practitioners suggested that the intervention is regarded as usable and feasible. Conclusions & Implications: Growth in morphosyntactic skills of children in the intervention period was demonstrated, but this could not be proven to be related to the intervention because both target and control structures improved during the intervention. This growth might be due to maturation instead of the intervention. Nevertheless, our study demonstrates that the morphosyntactic skills of preschoolers with DLD can show considerable improvement over a period of 8 weeks. Furthermore, our study underlines the importance of using LSA measures when monitoring the morphosyntactic development of children, as they might be more sensitive to change than standardised tests. WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS: What is already known on the subject: Most children with Developmental Language Disorder (DLD) experience difficulties in their morphosyntactic development. In the Netherlands, preschoolers with DLD can receive special care in language‐focused treatment groups. These groups mainly focus on stimulating communicative intentions, vocabulary and phonology, but less so on stimulating morphosyntactic skills. What this study adds: We designed a new group‐based intervention targeting the expressive morphosyntactic skills of children with DLD, examined the effect and investigated the usability and feasibility. Although there is strong evidence for growth in morphological skills, intervention effects could not be demonstrated. Evaluations among practitioners suggested that the intervention is regarded as usable and feasible. Furthermore, this study shows that children's morphosyntactic skills can improve over relatively short periods of time and language sample analyses seem to be sensitive to detect these changes. What are the clinical implications of this work?: Currently, very few group‐based morphosyntactic interventions exist (in the Netherlands). Since practitioners were generally positive about the intervention and its usability and feasibility, the proposed intervention might benefit the treatment of morphosyntactic problems in children with DLD. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Gifted children are described as very talented children who achieve more than their age mates in one or more domains (Steiner and Carr in Educ Psychol Rev 15(3):215-246, 2003). These children potentially share a cognitive advantage enabling them to excel in language, but also in other domains. In the present study we explored whether gifted children have a relatively advanced procedural memory. We further investigated the relation between procedural memory and complex syntactic comprehension. 25 gifted children and as many non-gifted children between ages 8 and 13 were administered a serial reaction time (SRT) task and a relative clause comprehension task. Results from the SRT task showed no significant difference between gifted children and their TD peers, whereas gifted children showed significant better comprehension of object relative clauses. No significant correlations were found between the two tasks. There was thus no evidence that gifted children excel in procedural memory. Possibly some other factor, such as meta-linguistic knowledge or a beneficial social environment, contributed to their advanced linguistic comprehension.

Gifted children are described as very talented children who achieve more than their age mates in one or more domains (Steiner and Carr in Educ Psychol Rev 15(3):215-246, 2003). These children potentially share a cognitive advantage enabling them to excel in language, but also in other domains. In the present study we explored whether gifted children have a relatively advanced procedural memory. We further investigated the relation between procedural memory and complex syntactic comprehension. 25 gifted children and as many non-gifted children between ages 8 and 13 were administered a serial reaction time (SRT) task and a relative clause comprehension task. Results from the SRT task showed no significant difference between gifted children and their TD peers, whereas gifted children showed significant better comprehension of object relative clauses. No significant correlations were found between the two tasks. There was thus no evidence that gifted children excel in procedural memory. Possibly some other factor, such as meta-linguistic knowledge or a beneficial social environment, contributed to their advanced linguistic comprehension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We conducted a close replication of the seminal work by Marcus and colleagues from 1999, which showed that after a brief auditory exposure phase, 7-month-old infants were able to learn and generalize a rule to novel syllables not previously present in the exposure phase. This work became the foundation for the theoretical framework by which we assume that infants are able to learn abstract representations and generalize linguistic rules. While some extensions on the original work have shown evidence of rule learning, the outcomes are mixed, and an exact replication of Marcus et al.'s study has thus far not been reported. A recent meta-analysis by Rabagliati and colleagues brings to light that the rule-learning effect depends on stimulus type (e.g., meaningfulness, speech vs. nonspeech) and is not as robust as often assumed. In light of the theoretical importance of the issue at stake, it is appropriate and necessary to assess the replicability and robustness of Marcus et al.'s findings. Here we have undertaken a replication across four labs with a large sample of 7-month-old infants (N = 96), using the same exposure patterns (ABA and ABB), methodology (Headturn Preference Paradigm), and original stimuli. As in the original study, we tested the hypothesis that infants are able to learn abstract "algebraic" rules and apply them to novel input. Our results did not replicate the original findings: infants showed no difference in looking time between test patterns consistent or inconsistent with the familiarization pattern they were exposed to., (© 2022 The Authors. Developmental Science published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)