PubMed · 10327932
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
S A Spence. 1999. More stringent threshold needed.. https://doi.org/10.1176/ajp.156.5.803a
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
There is growing evidence that infants become sensitive to the probabilistic phonotactics of their ambient language sometime during the second half of their first year. The present study investigates whether 9-month-olds make use of phonotactic cues to segment words from fluent speech. Using the Headturn Preference Procedure, we found that infants listened to a CVC stimulus longer when the stimulus previously appeared in a sentential context with good phonotactic cues than when it appeared in one without such cues. The goodness of the phonotactic cues was estimated from the frequency with which the C.C clusters at the onset and offset of a CVC test stimulus (i.e. C.CVC.C) are found within and between words in child-directed speech, with high between-word probability associated with good cues to word boundaries. A similar segmentation result emerged when good phonotactic cues occurred only at the onset (i.e. C.CVC.C) or the offset (i.e. C.CVC.C) of the target words in the utterances. Together, the results suggest that 9-month-olds use probabilistic phonotactics to segment speech into words and that high-probability between-word clusters are interpreted as both word onsets and word offsets.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Recent research suggests that infants' understanding of the physical world is more complex and adult-like than previously believed. One of the most impressive discoveries has been infants' ability to reason about medium-sized, material objects. They are able to individuate objects in a scene, and to enumerate and reason about them. This article reports a series of experiments investigating 8-month-old infants' ability to reason about collections of objects. Experiment 1 shows a sharp contrast between infants' understanding of single objects versus collections. While infants detected the discontinuous ('Magical') disappearance of a single object, they did not detect the Magical Disappearance of a non-cohesive pile of objects. Experiments 2-4 found that infants' difficulty remained even when the distinct identity of each object in the collection was emphasized, but could be overcome if infants (a) first saw the individual objects clearly separated from each other prior to their being placed together in a pile, or (b) had prior experience with the objects making up the collection. Our findings suggest that infants' expectations about object behavior are highly specific regarding the entities they are applied to. They do not automatically apply to any and all portions of matter within the visual field. Both the behavior of an entity, and infants' prior experience play roles in determining whether infants will treat that entity as an object.