4.2 Article

Estimating Demographic Bias on Tests of Children's Early Vocabulary

Journal

TOPICS IN COGNITIVE SCIENCE
Volume 15, Issue 2, Pages 303-314

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/tops.12635

Keywords

Language acquisition; Word learning; Measuring instrument bias; Demographic bias

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Accurately measuring children's early language skills is important for predicting educational outcomes. Parent-reported instruments, like the Communicative Development Inventories (CDIs), have been shown to be reliable measures of children's language abilities. However, CDIs may contain biased vocabulary items based on sex, race, and maternal education. Removing these biased items can reduce but not eliminate differences. Additionally, the relative frequency of words spoken to girls and boys can predict gender-based word learning bias.
Children's early language skill has been linked to later educational outcomes, making it important to measure early language accurately. Parent-reported instruments, such as the Communicative Development Inventories (CDIs), have been shown to provide reliable and valid measures of children's aggregate early language skill. However, CDIs contain hundreds of vocabulary items, some of which may not be heard (and thus learned) equally often by children of varying backgrounds. This study used a database of American English CDIs to identify words demonstrating strong bias for particular demographic groups of children, on dimensions of sex (male vs. female), race (white vs. non-white), and maternal education (high vs. low). For each dimension, many items showed bias; removing these items slightly reduced the magnitude of race- and education-based group differences, but did not eliminate them. Additionally, we investigated how well the relative frequency of words spoken to young girls versus boys predicted sex-based word learning bias, and discuss possible sources of demographic differences in early word learning.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available