Search

Studies have shown the importance of caregivers’ multimodal behaviours (e.g., prosody, gestures, gaze) on children’s word learning. However, most studies focus on only one specific behaviour (e.g., only prosody). Here, we investigate which multimodal behaviours used by caregivers best predict children’s word learning and vocabulary growth. Using data from the ECOLANG corpus, we analysed caregiver behaviour in semi-naturalistic interactions with their child (3 to 4 years old) in which they talked about known and unknown toys. We analysed caregivers’ (n=36) use of multimodal cues while labelling the objects, specifically their use of yes/no questions, pitch, representational gestures, pointing, object manipulations and gaze. Caregivers’ pitch, use of yes/no questions and pointing predicted children’s word learning. In particular, higher pitch when labelling unknown toys predicted immediate word learning. The degree to which caregivers used higher pitch when producing the label for known compared to unknown toys predicted both immediate learning and vocabulary growth. Furthermore, the degree to which caregivers used yes/no questions more for unknown toys predicted immediate learning, while the frequency of yes/no questions when naming unknown toys predicted vocabulary growth. Lastly, caregiver pointing also predicted immediate label learning and vocabulary growth, but in the opposite direction from prosody: the more they pointed towards known toys, the better children’s learning of novel toy labels. Other behaviours did not predict word learning. Overall, these results provide evidence for the important role of multimodal caregiver behaviours, particularly prosody, on children’s lexical development.

Substantial research suggests that high variability (multitalker) phonetic training helps second language (L2) adults improve differentiation of challenging nonnative speech sounds. Is such training also useful for L2 children? Existing studies have mixed findings and important limitations. We investigate the potential benefits of computerized phonetic training for 50 Dutch 7‐year‐olds and 39 11‐year‐olds trained on English vowel contrasts in a 2‐week study in a classroom setting. Half received multitalker, and half received single‐talker input (i.e., high variability vs. low variability; HV vs. LV), with learning evaluated by a battery of tests. Both groups improved in training; however, 11‐year‐olds improved more. Moreover, 11‐year‐olds showed generalization to novel talkers, and 7‐year‐olds did not, with Bayes factor analyses providing evidence for the null. Generalisation in 11‐year‐olds was no greater following HV than LV input, with evidence for the null on one of two tasks where generalization was found. Results are discussed in terms of the interplay between age, task demands, and talker variability. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Input variability is key in many aspects of linguistic learning, yet variability increases input complexity, which may cause difficulty in some learning contexts. The current work investigates this trade-off by comparing speaker variability effects on L2 vocabulary learning in different age groups. Existing literature suggests that speaker variability benefits L2 vocabulary learning in adults, but this may not be the case for younger learners. In this study native English-speaking adults, 7- to 8-year-olds, and 10- to 11-year-olds learned six novel Lithuanian words from a single speaker, and six from eight speakers. In line with previous research, adults showed better production of the multispeaker items at test. No such benefit was found for either group of children, either in production or comprehension. Children also had greater difficulties in processing multiple-speaker cues during training. We conclude that age-related capacity limitations may constrain the ability to utilize speaker variability when learning words in a new language.

Background: Familiar collocations (e.g., "it's alright") are an important part of everyday conversation. Such word combinations are often retained in speakers with Broca's aphasia. However, only few investigations have studied the forms and functions of familiar collocations available to speakers with Broca's aphasia. Aims: We first apply a frequency-based perspective to word combinations produced by speakers with Broca's aphasia and their conversation partners (CPs), and compare the frequency characteristics of word combinations in dyadic and non-dyadic speech. Second, we investigate the conversational functions of one prominent familiar collocation, "I don't know" (IDK). Methods & Procedures: In the first analysis, speech samples from interactions of nine dyads (each a speaker with Broca's aphasia and their CP) were examined. Non-dyadic samples were selected from 39 speakers with Broca's aphasia from AphasiaBank (MacWhinney et al., 2011). The Frequency in Language Analysis Tool (FLAT; Zimmerer & Wibrow, 2015) was used to estimate collocation strength (the degree of association between words in a combination) of well-formed bigrams (two-word combinations) and trigrams (three-word combinations). The second analysis presents a qualitative investigation of uses of IDK in dyadic exchanges. Outcomes & Results: Analysis 1 revealed that residual trigrams in Broca's aphasia were more strongly collocated in comparison to language produced by CPs. There was no difference in frequency-based profiles between dyadic and non-dyadic aphasic speech. Analysis 2 indicated that speakers with Broca's aphasia and CPs used IDK to achieve a variety of communicative functions. However, patterns specific to each participant group were found. Conclusions: These findings highlight that frequency-based analysis is useful in explaining residual, grammatically well-formed word combinations in Broca's aphasia. This study provides evidence that IDK can aid turn construction in aphasia. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Linguistica is the property of Linguistica and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

• Phonetic training can enable learners to distinguish between non-native phonemes. • Seminal studies propose that high talker variability (HV) is key to generalisation. • We conducted a replication (N = 166) of seminal studies to test for such a HV benefit. • All evidence for a HV benefit was ambiguous, contradicting original findings. • Our study raises questions about the true size and robustness of the HV benefit. Acquiring non-native speech contrasts can be difficult. A seminal study by Logan, Lively and Pisoni (1991) established the effectiveness of phonetic training for improving non-native speech perception: Japanese learners of English were trained to perceive /r/-/l/ using minimal pairs over 15 training sessions. A pre/post-test design established learning and generalisation. In a follow-up study, Lively, Logan and Pisoni (1993) presented further evidence which suggested that talker variability in training stimuli was crucial in leading to greater generalisation. These findings have been very influential and "high variability phonetic training" is now a standard methodology in the field. However, while the general benefit of phonetic training is well replicated, the evidence for an advantage of high over lower variability training remains mixed. In a large-scale replication of the original studies using updated statistical analyses we test whether learners generalise more after phonetic training using multiple talkers over a single talker. We find that listeners learn in both multiple and single talker conditions. However, in training, we find no difference in how well listeners learn for high vs low variability training. When comparing generalisation to novel talkers after training in relation to pre-training accuracy, we find ambiguous evidence for a high-variability benefit over low-variability training: This means that if a high-variability benefit exists, the effect is much smaller than originally thought, such that it cannot be detected in our sample of 166 listeners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In recent years, the scientific community has called for improvements in the credibility, robustness and reproducibility of research, characterized by increased interest and promotion of open and transparent research practices. While progress has been positive, there is a lack of consideration about how this approach can be embedded into undergraduate and postgraduate research training. Specifically, a critical overview of the literature which investigates how integrating open and reproducible science may influence student outcomes is needed. In this paper, we provide the first critical review of literature surrounding the integration of open and reproducible scholarship into teaching and learning and its associated outcomes in students. Our review highlighted how embedding open and reproducible scholarship appears to be associated with (i) students' scientific literacies (i.e. students' understanding of open research, consumption of science and the development of transferable skills); (ii) student engagement (i.e. motivation and engagement with learning, collaboration and engagement in open research) and (iii) students' attitudes towards science (i.e. trust in science and confidence in research findings). However, our review also identified a need for more robust and rigorous methods within pedagogical research, including more interventional and experimental evaluations of teaching practice. We discuss implications for teaching and learning scholarship., Competing Interests: We declare we have no competing interests., (© 2023 The Authors.)