Quantifying infants' statistical word segmentation: a meta-analysis

Theories of language acquisition and perceptual learning increasingly rely on statistical learning mechanisms. The current meta-analysis aims to clarify the robustness of this capacity in infancy within the word segmentation literature. Our analysis reveals a significant, small effect size for conceptual replications of Saffran, Aslin, & Newport (1996), and a nonsignificant effect across all studies that incorporate transitional probabilities to segment words. In both conceptual replications and the broader literature, however, statistical learning is moderated by whether stimuli are naturally produced or synthesized. These findings invite deeper questions about the complex factors that influence statistical learning, and the role of statistical learning in language acquisition.

[1]  Leif D. Nelson,et al.  P-Curve: A Key to the File Drawer , 2013, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[2]  P. Jusczyk,et al.  The head-turn preference procedure for testing auditory perception , 1995 .

[3]  Mark Steyvers,et al.  Online Learning Mechanisms for Bayesian Models of Word Segmentation , 2010 .

[4]  Katharine Graf Estes,et al.  Listening through voices: Infant statistical word segmentation across multiple speakers. , 2015, Developmental psychology.

[5]  Elizabeth K. Johnson,et al.  Testing the limits of statistical learning for word segmentation. , 2010, Developmental science.

[6]  R Core Team,et al.  R: A language and environment for statistical computing. , 2014 .

[7]  M. Goldsmith,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996 .

[8]  Wolfgang Viechtbauer,et al.  Conducting Meta-Analyses in R with the metafor Package , 2010 .

[9]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  The Goldilocks Effect: Human Infants Allocate Attention to Visual Sequences That Are Neither Too Simple Nor Too Complex , 2012, PloS one.

[10]  R. Aslin.  Statistical learning: a powerful mechanism that operates by mere exposure. , 2017, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[11]  Jenny R. Saffran,et al.  All words are not created equal: Expectations about word length guide infant statistical learning , 2012, Cognition.

[12]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  A Quantitative Synthesis of Early Language Acquisition Using Meta-Analysis , 2016 .

[13]  C. Bergmann,et al.  Development of infants' segmentation of words from native speech: a meta-analytic approach. , 2016, Developmental science.

[14]  Erik D. Thiessen,et al.  When cues collide: use of stress and statistical cues to word boundaries by 7- to 9-month-old infants. , 2003, Developmental psychology.

[15]  W. Dunlap,et al.  Meta-Analysis of Experiments With Matched Groups or Repeated Measures Designs , 1996 .

[16]  Stephane Champely,et al.  Basic Functions for Power Analysis , 2015 .

[17]  E. W. Ames,et al.  A multifactor model of infant preferences for novel and familiar stimuli. , 1988 .

[18]  Richard N Aslin,et al.  The Goldilocks effect in infant auditory attention. , 2014, Child development.

[19]  S. Morris,et al.  Distribution of the standardized mean change effect size for meta-analysis on repeated measures. , 2000, The British journal of mathematical and statistical psychology.

[20]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  A Collaborative Approach to Infant Research: Promoting Reproducibility, Best Practices, and Theory-Building. , 2017, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[21]  P. Lachenbruch.  Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences (2nd ed.) , 1989 .

[22]  Elissa L Newport,et al.  Statistical language learning: computational, maturational, and linguistic constraints , 2016, Language and Cognition.

[23]  Fernand Gobet,et al.  Under Pressure: How Time-Limited Cognition Explains Statistical Learning by 8-Month Old Infants , 2016, CogSci.