ManyBabies 3: A Multi‐Lab Study of Infant Algebraic Rule Learning

ABSTRACT The ability to learn and apply rules lies at the heart of cognition. In a seminal study, Marcus et al. (1999) reported that 7‐month‐old infants learned abstract rules over syllable sequences and were able to generalize those rules to novel syllable sequences. Dozens of studies have since replicated that finding and extended it using different rules, modalities, stimuli, participants (human adults and non‐human animals) and experimental procedures. Yet questions remain about the generalizability of the core findings in Marcus et al., and sources of variation across these findings. In the current study, we address this issue by testing 839 infants (650 after exclusions) of a wide age range (5;0–12;0 months) in a multi‐laboratory (30 laboratories, [31 samples]) conceptual replication of the Marcus et al. study. This study and the analysis plan were submitted as a registered report. A mixed‐model analysis of the looking times at consistent versus inconsistent test trials indicated no significant effect. The current study therefore finds no evidence for rule‐learning; to the contrary, a Bayesian analysis of the data indicated strong evidence for a null effect. This was similarly the case for the moderating factors that were part of the design: mono‐ versus multilingualism, age, and experimental paradigm; none of these factors showed significant effects. Robustness analyses indicated that the results were not different in the case of different choices in the (pre‐)processing of the data. A follow‐up analysis for single labs indicated that there was no evidence of rule‐learning in 30 of the 31 contributed samples. The current finding raises fundamental issues about rule‐learning that are presented in the Discussion section.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Developmental Science
Published
2026-09-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.70259
Primary Topic
Child and Animal Learning Development
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
article

ManyBabies 3: A Multi‐Lab Study of Infant Algebraic Rule Learning

Heidi A. Baumgartner, Emma Axelsson, Suzanne Aussems, Shannon P Kong et al.
Developmental Science
Child and Animal Learning Development
article

ManyBabies 3: A Multi‐Lab Study of Infant Algebraic Rule Learning

Heidi A. Baumgartner, Emma Axelsson, Suzanne Aussems, Shannon P Kong, Alexis K. Black, Laura Franchin, Samuel H. Forbes, Sudha Arunachalam, Elísabet Eir Cortes, Rodica R. Constantine, Krista Byers‐Heinlein, Tania S. Zamuner, Martin Zettersten, Gert Westermann, Natalia Kartushina, Angeline Tsui, Kateřina Chládková, David Moreau, Naomi Havron, Ellen Marklund, Alessandra Geraci, Jessica Elizabeth Kosie, Nayeli Gonzalez‐Gomez, Joscelin Rocha‐Hidalgo, Nadja Althaus, Iris‐Corinna Schwarz, Audun Rosslund, Scarlet Wan Yee Li, Lily Carroll, Michał Misiak, Alexandra Carstensen, George Kachergis, Piotr Sorokowski, Monika Kučerová, Ivonne Weyers, Roberta Bettoni, Frances L. Doyle, Anna Exner, Stephanie Wermelinger, Alyssa A. Quinn, Melissa Kline, Judit Gervain, Hermann Bulf, Xiaoyun Chen, Chiara Capparini, Erin E. Hannon, Mélanie Söderström, Sagi Jaffe‐Dax, Wiktoria Jędryczka, Scott P. Johnson, Jeanne L. Shinskey, Sylvain Sirois, Julien Mayor, Lisa Wagner, Casey Lew‐Williams, Amber Muhinyi, Andreea Geambașu, Ingmar Visser, Clara C. Levelt, Jutta L. Mueller, Nicolás Alessandroni, Silje Hagelund, Simone Zasso, Zeynep Aydın, Mohinish Shukla, Romi Livne, Rebekka Cebulla, Benedetta Colavolpe, Ada Koleini, Abhini Kona, Basma Sowan, Martina Turconi, Teruni Malaika Ahamat, Barbara Zapiór, Rebeca C. Urizar, J. Grace Zhou, Tibor Tauzin, Jared Wayne Leslie, Christina Bergmann, Katerina Cook, Cátia M. Oliveira, Maartje E. J. Raijmakers, Martina S. Zaharieva, Luiza S. B. Yuan
article en

Abstract

ABSTRACT The ability to learn and apply rules lies at the heart of cognition. In a seminal study, Marcus et al. (1999) reported that 7‐month‐old infants learned abstract rules over syllable sequences and were able to generalize those rules to novel syllable sequences. Dozens of studies have since replicated that finding and extended it using different rules, modalities, stimuli, participants (human adults and non‐human animals) and experimental procedures. Yet questions remain about the generalizability of the core findings in Marcus et al., and sources of variation across these findings. In the current study, we address this issue by testing 839 infants (650 after exclusions) of a wide age range (5;0–12;0 months) in a multi‐laboratory (30 laboratories, [31 samples]) conceptual replication of the Marcus et al. study. This study and the analysis plan were submitted as a registered report. A mixed‐model analysis of the looking times at consistent versus inconsistent test trials indicated no significant effect. The current study therefore finds no evidence for rule‐learning; to the contrary, a Bayesian analysis of the data indicated strong evidence for a null effect. This was similarly the case for the moderating factors that were part of the design: mono‐ versus multilingualism, age, and experimental paradigm; none of these factors showed significant effects. Robustness analyses indicated that the results were not different in the case of different choices in the (pre‐)processing of the data. A follow‐up analysis for single labs indicated that there was no evidence of rule‐learning in 30 of the 31 contributed samples. The current finding raises fundamental issues about rule‐learning that are presented in the Discussion section.

Developmental ScienceVol. 29(6)
University of East Anglia (GB), Università di Camerino (IT), Leiden University (NL), Oxford Brookes University (GB), Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (FR), University of Vienna (AT), Pennsylvania State University (US), Université Libre de Bruxelles (BE), University of Nevada, Las Vegas (US), Center for Applied Linguistics (US), University of Padua (IT), University of British Columbia (CA), McGovern Institute for Brain Research (US), University of Ottawa (CA), University of Auckland (NZ), University of California, Los Angeles (US), Stockholm University (SE), Tel Aviv University (IL), Osnabrück University (DE), Royal Holloway University of London (GB), University of Oslo (NO), Durham University (GB), University of Trento (IT), Princeton University (US), University of Zurich (CH), University of Applied Sciences Leiden (NL), Charles University (CZ), University of Wrocław (PL), University of California San Diego (US), University of Catania (IT), University of Warwick (GB), University of Oxford (GB), Max Planck Institute for Psycholinguistics (NL), Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of Sociology (CZ), Institute of Cognitive and Brain Sciences (US), Help For Children (US), Institute of Psychology (PL), Czech Academy of Sciences, Institute of History (CZ), Hochschule Osnabrück (DE), University of Manitoba (CA), University of York (GB), Arizona State University (US), New York University (US), Concordia University (CA), Université du Québec à Trois-Rivières (CA), Massachusetts Institute of Technology (US), University of Milano-Bicocca (IT), Lancaster University (GB), Rice University (US), University of Newcastle Australia (AU), Cardiff University (GB), University of Amsterdam (NL), Ruhr University Bochum (DE), University of Haifa (IL), Stanford University (US), Macquarie University (AU)
Quality Education
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Child and Animal Learning Development
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
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.