Exploring the “anchor word” effect in infants: Segmentation and categorisation of speech with and without high frequency words

High frequency words play a key role in language acquisition, with recent work suggesting they may serve both speech segmentation and lexical categorisation. However, it is not yet known whether infants can detect novel high frequency words in continuous speech, nor whether they can use them to help learning for segmentation and categorisation at the same time. For instance, when hearing “you eat the biscuit”, can children use the high-frequency words “you” and “the” to segment out “eat” and “biscuit”, and determine their respective lexical categories? We tested this in two experiments. In Experiment 1, we familiarised 12-month-old infants with continuous artificial speech comprising repetitions of target words, which were preceded by high-frequency marker words that distinguished the targets into two distributional categories. In Experiment 2, we repeated the task using the same language but with additional phonological cues to word and category structure. In both studies, we measured learning with head-turn preference tests of segmentation and categorisation, and compared performance against a control group that heard the artificial speech without the marker words (i.e., just the targets). There was no evidence that high frequency words helped either speech segmentation or grammatical categorisation. However, segmentation was seen to improve when the distributional information was supplemented with phonological cues (Experiment 2). In both experiments, exploratory analysis indicated that infants’ looking behaviour was related to their linguistic maturity (indexed by infants’ vocabulary scores) with infants with high versus low vocabulary scores displaying novelty and familiarity preferences, respectively. We propose that high-frequency words must reach a critical threshold of familiarity before they can be of significant benefit to learning.

[1]  Xiaoxiang Chen,et al.  Book Review: Current Perspectives on Child Language Acquisition: How Children Use Their Environment to Learn , 2021, Frontiers in Psychology.

[2]  Caroline F. Rowland,et al.  Non-adjacent dependency learning in infancy, and its link to language development , 2020, Cognitive Psychology.

[3]  Rebecca Louise Ann Frost,et al.  Insights from studying statistical learning , 2020 .

[4]  Jenny R. Saffran,et al.  Statistical learning mechanisms in infancy , 2020, Neural Circuit and Cognitive Development.

[5]  Rebecca Louise Ann Frost,et al.  Testing the limits of non-adjacent dependency learning: Statistical segmentation and generalization across domains , 2019, CogSci.

[6]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Comparing Statistical Learning Across Perceptual Modalities in Infancy: An Investigation of Underlying Learning Mechanism(s). , 2019, Developmental science.

[7]  Toben H. Mintz,et al.  Successfully learning non-adjacent dependencies in a continuous artificial language stream , 2019, Cognitive Psychology.

[8]  Jill Lany,et al.  Individual differences in non-adjacent statistical dependency learning in infants , 2019, Journal of Child Language.

[9]  T. Nazzi,et al.  Infants' sensitivity to nonadjacent vowel dependencies: The case of vowel harmony in Hungarian. , 2019, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[10]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Mark My Words: High Frequency Marker Words Impact Early Stages of Language Learning , 2019, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[11]  R. Gómez,et al.  How who is talking matters as much as what they say to infant language learners , 2018, Cognitive Psychology.

[12]  Stewart M. McCauley,et al.  Segmentation of Highly Vocalic Speech Via Statistical Learning: Initial Results From Danish, Norwegian, and English , 2018, Language Learning.

[13]  Natalie Boll-Avetisyan The role of phonological structure in speech segmentation by infants and adults: a review and methodological considerations , 2018 .

[14]  Celeste Kidd,et al.  Infants' sensitivity to vowel harmony and its role in segmenting speech , 2018, Cognition.

[15]  Per B. Brockhoff,et al.  lmerTest Package: Tests in Linear Mixed Effects Models , 2017 .

[16]  Padraic Monaghan,et al.  Canalization of Language Structure From Environmental Constraints: A Computational Model of Word Learning From Multiple Cues , 2016, Top. Cogn. Sci..

[17]  Padraic Monaghan,et al.  Domain-General Mechanisms for Speech Segmentation: The Role of Duration Information in Language Learning , 2016, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[18]  A. Hohenberger,et al.  Discrimination of Vowel-Harmonic vs Vowel-Disharmonic Words by Monolingual Turkish Infants in the First Year of Life , 2017 .

[19]  Christina Bergmann,et al.  Quantifying infants' statistical word segmentation: a meta-analysis , 2017, CogSci.

[20]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Using Statistics to Learn Words and Grammatical Categories: How High Frequency Words Assist Language Acquisition , 2016, CogSci.

[21]  Kevin J. Grimm,et al.  Finding patterns and learning words: Infant phonotactic knowledge is associated with vocabulary size. , 2016, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[22]  R. Gómez,et al.  Overriding the Metrical Bias with Lexical Information: English-Learning 7.5-Month-Olds Use Mommy to Segment Iambic Words , 2016 .

[23]  Natalie Boll-Avetisyan,et al.  Is speech processing influenced by abstract or detailed phonotactic representations? The case of the Obligatory Contour Principle , 2016 .

[24]  A. Rodríguez-Fornells,et al.  Headstart for speech segmentation: a neural signature for the anchor word effect , 2016, Neuropsychologia.

[25]  A. Hohenberger,et al.  Sensitivity of Turkish Infants to Vowel Harmony in Stem- suffix Sequences: Preference Shift from Familiarity to Novelty , 2016 .

[26]  R. Gómez,et al.  Does hearing two dialects at different times help infants learn dialect-specific rules? , 2015, Cognition.

[27]  Anna L. Theakston,et al.  The ubiquity of frequency effects in first language acquisition , 2015, Journal of Child Language.

[28]  L. Bonatti,et al.  Finding words and word structure in artificial speech: the development of infants' sensitivity to morphosyntactic regularities* , 2014, Journal of Child Language.

[29]  James White,et al.  Biased generalization of newly learned phonological alternations by 12-month-old infants , 2014, Cognition.

[30]  Natalie Boll-Avetisyan,et al.  OCP-PLACE in Speech Segmentation , 2014 .

[31]  Jill Lany,et al.  Judging words by their covers and the company they keep: probabilistic cues support word learning. , 2014, Child development.

[32]  D. Bates,et al.  Fitting Linear Mixed-Effects Models Using lme4 , 2014, 1406.5823.

[33]  Richard N. Aslin,et al.  Models of Word Segmentation in Fluent Maternal Speech to Infants , 2014 .

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

[35]  Luca L. Bonatti,et al.  Words and possible words in early language acquisition , 2013, Cognitive Psychology.

[36]  Nivedita Mani,et al.  Word-form familiarity bootstraps infant speech segmentation. , 2013, Developmental science.

[37]  Padraic Monaghan,et al.  Disambiguating durational cues for speech segmentation. , 2013, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[38]  Michael C. Frank,et al.  Zipfian frequency distributions facilitate word segmentation in context , 2013, Cognition.

[39]  T. Nazzi,et al.  Effects of prior phonotactic knowledge on infant word segmentation: the case of nonadjacent dependencies. , 2013, Journal of speech, language, and hearing research : JSLHR.

[40]  D. Barr,et al.  Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. , 2013, Journal of memory and language.

[41]  Thierry Nazzi,et al.  When Mommy Comes to the Rescue of Statistics: Infants Combine Top-Down and Bottom-Up Cues to Segment Speech , 2012 .

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

[43]  Casey Lew-Williams,et al.  Isolated words enhance statistical language learning in infancy. , 2011, Developmental science.

[44]  J. Saffran,et al.  Interactions between statistical and semantic information in infant language development. , 2011, Developmental science.

[45]  Elena Lieven,et al.  Input and first language acquisition: Evaluating the role of frequency , 2010 .

[46]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Learning grammatical categories from distributional cues: Flexible frames for language acquisition , 2010, Cognition.

[47]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Words in puddles of sound: modelling psycholinguistic effects in speech segmentation. , 2010, Journal of child language.

[48]  N. Kazanina,et al.  Listeners Use Vowel Harmony and Word-Final Stress to Spot Nonsense Words: A Study of Turkish and French , 2010 .

[49]  LouAnn Gerken,et al.  Infants use rational decision criteria for choosing among models of their input , 2010, Cognition.

[50]  R. Kager,et al.  Adding Generalization to Statistical Learning: The Induction of Phonotactics from Continuous Speech. , 2010 .

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

[52]  Christopher M. Conway,et al.  Implicit statistical learning in language processing: Word predictability is the key , 2010, Cognition.

[53]  Jill Lany,et al.  From Statistics to Meaning , 2010, Psychological science.

[54]  A. Rodríguez-Fornells,et al.  Words as anchors: known words facilitate statistical learning. , 2010, Experimental psychology.

[55]  Jessica F. Hay,et al.  Statistical learning in a natural language by 8-month-old infants. , 2009, Child development.

[56]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  The secret is in the sound: from unsegmented speech to lexical categories. , 2009, Developmental science.

[57]  Patrizia Tabossi,et al.  Phonotactic regularities in the segmentation of spoken Italian , 2009, Quarterly journal of experimental psychology.

[58]  Paavo Alku,et al.  Statistical language learning in neonates revealed by event-related brain potentials , 2009, BMC Neuroscience.

[59]  R. Gómez,et al.  Twelve-Month-Old Infants Benefit From Prior Experience in Statistical Learning , 2008, Psychological science.

[60]  R. Baayen,et al.  Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items , 2008 .

[61]  Rushen Shi,et al.  The effect of functional morphemes on word segmentation in preverbal infants. , 2008, Developmental science.

[62]  Barbara Höhle,et al.  Metrical and statistical cues for word segmentation : the use of vowel harmony and word stress as a cue to word boundaries by 6- and 9-month-old Turkish learners , 2008 .

[63]  J. Morgan,et al.  SIGNAL TO SYNTAX : Bootstrapping From Speech to Grammar in Early Acquisition , 2008 .

[64]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  The phonological-distributional coherence hypothesis: Cross-linguistic evidence in language acquisition , 2007, Cognitive Psychology.

[65]  Jill Lany,et al.  The Role of Prior Experience in Language Acquisition , 2007, Cogn. Sci..

[66]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  Infant Rule Learning Facilitated by Speech , 2007, Psychological science.

[67]  LouAnn Gerken,et al.  Decisions, decisions: infant language learning when multiple generalizations are possible , 2006, Cognition.

[68]  Laurence White,et al.  Integration of multiple speech segmentation cues: a hierarchical framework. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[69]  Nick Chater,et al.  Phonology impacts segmentation in online speech processing , 2005 .

[70]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Stress changes the representational landscape: evidence from word segmentation , 2005, Cognition.

[71]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  The differential role of phonological and distributional cues in grammatical categorisation , 2005, Cognition.

[72]  L. Gerken,et al.  Infants can use distributional cues to form syntactic categories , 2005, Journal of Child Language.

[73]  J. Morgan,et al.  Mommy and Me , 2005, Psychological science.

[74]  R. Gómez,et al.  The Developmental Trajectory of Nonadjacent Dependency Learning. , 2005, Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant Studies.

[75]  Daniel Swingley,et al.  Statistical clustering and the contents of the infant vocabulary , 2005, Cognitive Psychology.

[76]  Satsuki Nakai,et al.  Distinguishing novelty and familiarity effects in infant preference procedures , 2004 .

[77]  R. Gómez,et al.  A first step in form-based category abstraction by 12-month-old infants. , 2004, Developmental science.

[78]  Toben H. Mintz Frequent frames as a cue for grammatical categories in child directed speech , 2003, Cognition.

[79]  R. Gómez Variability and Detection of Invariant Structure , 2002, Psychological science.

[80]  Toben H. Mintz Category induction from distributional cues in an artificial language , 2002, Memory & cognition.

[81]  Elissa L. Newport,et al.  The distributional structure of grammatical categories in speech to young children , 2002, Cogn. Sci..

[82]  Steven Gillis,et al.  Predicting Grammatical Classes from Phonological Cues , 2001 .

[83]  Steven Gillis,et al.  Predicting Grammatical Classes from Phonological Cues: An Empirical Test , 2001 .

[84]  Joost van de Weijer,et al.  The importance of single-word utterances for early word recognition. , 2001 .

[85]  Yasuhiro Shirai,et al.  The Acquisition of Lexical and Grammatical Aspect , 2000 .

[86]  Stefanie Shattuck-Hufnagel,et al.  Word-boundary-related duration patterns in English , 2000, J. Phonetics.

[87]  Peter M. Vishton,et al.  Rule learning by seven-month-old infants. , 1999, Science.

[88]  A. Vinter,et al.  PARSER: A Model for Word Segmentation , 1998 .

[89]  J. McQueen Segmentation of Continuous Speech Using Phonotactics , 1998 .

[90]  E. Newport,et al.  Computation of Conditional Probability Statistics by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1998 .

[91]  Morten H. Christiansen,et al.  Learning to Segment Speech Using Multiple Cues: A Connectionist Model , 1998 .

[92]  J. Vroomen,et al.  The Roles of Word Stress and Vowel Harmony in Speech Segmentation , 1998 .

[93]  Paul D. Allopenna,et al.  Phonological and acoustic bases for earliest grammatical category assignment: a cross-linguistic perspective , 1998, Journal of Child Language.

[94]  Paul Taylor,et al.  Festival Speech Synthesis System , 1998 .

[95]  J. Pind The Discovery of Spoken Language, Peter W. Jusczyk (Ed.). MIT Press (1997), ISBN 0 262 10058 4 , 1997 .

[96]  Anne Christophe Teresa Guasti Marina Nespor Reflections on Phonological Bootstrapping: Its Role for Lexical and Syntactic Acquisition , 1997 .

[97]  N. Chater,et al.  Bootstrapping Word Boundaries: A Bottom-up Corpus-Based Approach to Speech Segmentation , 1997, Cognitive Psychology.

[98]  A. Cutler,et al.  Vowel harmony and speech segmentation in Finnish , 1997 .

[99]  E. Newport,et al.  PSYCHOLOGICAL SCIENCE Research Article INCIDENTAL LANGUAGE LEARNING: Ustening (and Learning) out of the Comer of Your Ear , 2022 .

[100]  R N Aslin,et al.  Statistical Learning by 8-Month-Old Infants , 1996, Science.

[101]  T. A. Cartwright,et al.  Distributional regularity and phonotactic constraints are useful for segmentation , 1996, Cognition.

[102]  James L. Morgan,et al.  Signal to syntax : bootstrapping from speech to grammar in early acquisition , 1996 .

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

[104]  A. Cutler Phonological cues to open- and closed-class words in the processing of spoken sentences , 1993, Journal of Psycholinguistic Research.

[105]  M. H. Kelly,et al.  Using sound to solve syntactic problems: the role of phonology in grammatical category assignments. , 1992, Psychological review.

[106]  M. H. Kelly,et al.  Phonological information for grammatical category assignments , 1991 .

[107]  Allard Jongman,et al.  Phonological and form class relations in the lexicon , 1990 .

[108]  Virginia Valian,et al.  Anchor points in language learning: The role of marker frequency ☆ , 1988 .

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

[110]  Eric Wanner,et al.  Language acquisition: the state of the art , 1982 .

[111]  G. Zipf,et al.  The Psycho-Biology of Language , 1936 .