Event-related potential studies of cross-situational word learning in four-year-old children

The Influence of Bilingualism on Statistical Word Learning: A Registered Report

“…Yu and Smith (2007) found that participants could learn the correct word-object-mappings with brief but cross-situational exposure and without feedback. Since then, several studies have corroborated Yu and Smith's (2007) findings (See Roembke et al, in press, for a focused review), as learning via CSSL was found in adults (e.g., Bulgarelli et al, 2021;Chen et al, 2017;Mulak et al, 2019;Roembke & McMurray, 2016;Tuninetti et al, 2020;Wang, 2020), children (e.g., Mangardich & Sabbagh, 2022;McGregor et al, 2022;Suanda et al, 2014;Vlach & DeBrock, 2019) and even infants (e.g., Smith & Yu, 2008).…”

What have we learned from 15 years of research on cross-situational word learning? A focused review

“…As highlighted previously, they showed that 12-and 14-month-old infants were able to learn word-objects-mappings from cross-situational statistics after a short exposure. Since then, CSWL has been observed in children of different age groups (e.g., Smith and Yu, 2008;Scott and Fisher, 2012;Suanda et al, 2014;Bunce and Scott, 2017;Vlach and DeBrock, 2017;Roembke et al, 2018;Benitez et al, 2020;Crespo and Kaushanskaya, 2021;Mangardich and Sabbagh, 2022), children with developmental language disorder (DLD; Ahufinger et al, 2021;McGregor et al, 2022), children with autism (Venker, 2019;Hartley et al, 2020) and late talking children (Cheung et al, 2022) as well as older adults (Bulgarelli et al, 2021), adults with hippocampal amnesia (Warren et al, 2020) and aphasia (Peñaloza et al, 2017). CSWL was also effective when learning words in a second language (Hu, 2017;Tuninetti et al, 2020).…”

“…At the time of writing this review, Yu's and Smith's papers were cited 695 (2007) and 939 2 (2008) times, respectively, reflecting the wide interest in CSWL. The standard CSWL paradigm has been combined with other methods, such as eye-tracking (e.g., Christiansen, 2011, 2017;Yu and Smith, 2011;Trueswell et al, 2013;Roembke and McMurray, 2016), event-related potentials (e.g., Angwin et al, 2022;Mangardich and Sabbagh, 2022) or fMRI (Berens et al, 2018), and adapted to allow for more detailed trial-by-trial analyses of behavior (e.g., Suanda and Namy, 2012;Trueswell et al, 2013;Dautriche and Chemla, 2014;Roembke and FIGURE 1 Examples of the two most common variants of the cross-situational word learning paradigms. In Variant 1 (A), participants hear two novel words and see two novel objects on each trial in a passive learning phase (e.g., Yu and Smith, 2007).…”