2018
DOI: 10.1016/j.wocn.2017.12.002
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

An order effect in English infants’ discrimination of an Urdu affricate contrast

Abstract: An order effect was found in English infants' discrimination of an Urdu contrast. In Experiment 1 7-and 11-month-old English infants were tested on the Urdu contrast between the affricates /t / and /t /. The order of presentation was counterbalanced: At each age half the infants were habituated to the aspirated and tested on the unaspirated affricate, the other half habituated to the unaspirated and tested on the aspirated. As expected, younger infants discriminated the contrast whereas older infants did not, … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

2018
2018
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 75 publications
(100 reference statements)
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…As each participant heard one of 30 different lists of stimulus pairs (Section 3.1.2), List was also included as a random intercept. The order of the two stimuli in a given trial (Stimulus Order) was included as another random intercept, since the order of stimulus presentation has been reported to affect same-different discrimination judgments in some tasks (Best et al, 2001;Bundgaard-Nielsen, Baker, Kroos, Harvey, & Best, 2015;Cowan & Morse, 1986;Dar, Keren-Portnoy, & Vihman, 2018;Repp & Crowder, 1990).…”
Section: Random Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As each participant heard one of 30 different lists of stimulus pairs (Section 3.1.2), List was also included as a random intercept. The order of the two stimuli in a given trial (Stimulus Order) was included as another random intercept, since the order of stimulus presentation has been reported to affect same-different discrimination judgments in some tasks (Best et al, 2001;Bundgaard-Nielsen, Baker, Kroos, Harvey, & Best, 2015;Cowan & Morse, 1986;Dar, Keren-Portnoy, & Vihman, 2018;Repp & Crowder, 1990).…”
Section: Random Effectsmentioning
confidence: 99%