How strong is the relationship between caregiver speech and language development? A meta-analysis

A growing body of research has found that talking to young children is positively associated with language outcomes. However, there is tremendous heterogeneity in the design of these studies, which could potentially affect the strength and reliability of this association. The present meta-analysis, comprising 4760 participants across 71 studies, goes beyond prior research by including: 1) more recent studies, 2) non-English-speaking populations, 3) more fine-grained categorization of measures of input, 4) additional moderators, and 5) a multilevel model design allowing us to consider multiple effect sizes per study. We find a moderate association between input and outcomes (R<sup>2</sup>=0.04-0.07) across four input measures, with some evidence of publication bias. We find no differences in effect size across any of the input measures. Child age and study duration moderated some effects of input. Our findings suggest that language input-outcome associations remain robust but modest across a multitude of contexts and measures.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Child Language
Published
2025-01-10
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000924000692
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Language Development and Disorders
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
6.89
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

How strong is the relationship between caregiver speech and language development? A meta-analysis

Joseph Coffey, Jesse Snedeker
2 citations
Journal of Child Language
Language Development and Disorders
6.89
article

How strong is the relationship between caregiver speech and language development? A meta-analysis

Joseph Coffey, Jesse Snedeker
article en
2 citations

Abstract

A growing body of research has found that talking to young children is positively associated with language outcomes. However, there is tremendous heterogeneity in the design of these studies, which could potentially affect the strength and reliability of this association. The present meta-analysis, comprising 4760 participants across 71 studies, goes beyond prior research by including: 1) more recent studies, 2) non-English-speaking populations, 3) more fine-grained categorization of measures of input, 4) additional moderators, and 5) a multilevel model design allowing us to consider multiple effect sizes per study. We find a moderate association between input and outcomes (R<sup>2</sup>=0.04-0.07) across four input measures, with some evidence of publication bias. We find no differences in effect size across any of the input measures. Child age and study duration moderated some effects of input. Our findings suggest that language input-outcome associations remain robust but modest across a multitude of contexts and measures.

Journal of Child LanguageVol. 53(2)
Harvard University (US), Harvard University Press (US)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Language Development and Disorders
6.89
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.