Children's gradient sensitivity to phonological mismatch: considering the dynamics of looking behavior and pupil dilation

Linking vestibular, tactile, and somatosensory rhythm perception to language development in infancy

First experiences with rhythm occur in the womb, with different rhythmic sources being available to the human fetus. Among sensory modalities, vestibular, tactile, and somatosensory perception plays a crucial role in early processing. However, a limited number of studies so far have specifically focused on VTS rhythms in language development. The present work investigated VTS rhythmic abilities and their role in language acquisition through two experiments with 45 infants (21 females, sex assigned at birth; M age = 661.6 days, SD = 192.6) with middle/high socioeconomic status. Specifically, 37 infants from the original sample completed Experiment 1, assessing VTS rhythmic abilities through a vibrotactile tool for music perception. In Experiment 2, linguistic abilities were evaluated in 40 participants from the same cohort, specifically testing phonological and prosodic processing. Discrimination abilities for rhythmic and linguistic stimuli were inferred from changes in pupil diameter to contingent visual stimuli over time, through a Tobii X-60 eye-tracker. The predictive effect of VTS rhythmic abilities on linguistic processing and the developmental changes occurring across ages were explored in the 32 infants who completed both Experiments 1 and 2 by means of generalized, additive and linear, mixed-effect models. Results are discussed in terms of cross-sensory (i.e., haptic to hearing) and cross-domain (i.e., music to language) effects of rhythm on language acquisition, with implications for typical and atypical development.

A Protracted Developmental Trajectory for English-Learning Children's Detection of Consonant Mispronunciations in Newly Learned Words

Children are adept at learning their language's speech-sound categories, but just how these categories function in their developing lexicon has not been mapped out in detail. Here, we addressed whether, in a language-guided looking procedure, two-year-olds would respond to a mispronunciation of the voicing of the initial consonant of a newly learned word. First, to provide a baseline of mature native-speaker performance, adults were taught a new word under training conditions of low prosodic variability. In a second experiment, 24- and 30-month-olds were taught a new word under training conditions of high or low prosodic variability. Children and adults showed evidence of learning the taught word. Adults' target looking was reduced when the novel word was realized at test with a change in the voicing of the initial consonant, but children did not show any such decrement in target fixation. For both children and adults, most learners did not treat the phonologically distinct variant as a different word. Acoustic-phonetic variability during teaching did not have consistent effects. Thus, under conditions of intensive short-term training, 24- and 30-month-olds did not differentiate a newly learned word from a variant differing only in consonant voicing. High task complexity during training could explain why mispronunciation detection was weaker here than in some prior studies.

Does surprise enhance infant memory? Assessing the impact of the encoding context on subsequent object recognition

A discrepancy between what was predicted and what is observed has been linked to increased looking times, changes in brain electrical activity, and increased pupil dilation in infants. These processes associated with heightened attention and readiness to learn might enhance the encoding and memory consolidation of the surprising object, as suggested by both the infant and the adult literature. We therefore investigated whether the presence of surprise during the encoding context enhances subsequent encoding and recognition memory processes for the items that violated infants' expectations. Seventeen-month-olds viewed 20 familiar objects, half of which were labeled correctly, while the other half were mislabeled. Subsequently, infants were presented with a silent recognition memory test where the previously labeled objects appeared along with new images. Pupil dilation was measured, with more dilated pupils indicating (1) surprise during those labeling events where the item was mislabeled and (2) successful retrieval processes during the memory test. Infants responded with more pupil dilation to mislabeling compared to correct labeling. Importantly, despite the presence of a surprise response during mislabeling, infants only differentiated between the previously seen and unseen items at the memory test, offering no evidence that surprise had facilitated the encoding of the mislabeled items.