4.5 Review

Gender differences in early stages of language development. Some evidence and possible explanations

期刊

JOURNAL OF NEUROSCIENCE RESEARCH
卷 101, 期 5, 页码 643-653

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1002/jnr.24914

关键词

action-gesture; early language acquisition; gender differences; word comprehension; word production

向作者/读者索取更多资源

There is controversy regarding gender differences in early language acquisition. Various studies suggest that there are some differences in behavior, gestures, and lexical development between girls and boys, but this is influenced by multiple factors.
It is a common feeling that girls speak earlier than boys; however, whether or not there are gender differences in early language acquisition remains controversial. The present paper aims to review the research on gender effects in early language acquisition and development, to determine whether, and from which age, an advantage for girls does eventually emerge. The focus is on the production of actions and communicative gestures, and early lexical comprehension and production, by girls and boys. The data from various studies that were conducted with direct and indirect tools suggest that some gender differences in actions, gesture, and lexical development depend on the interactions of different factors. Studies differ in terms of age ranges, sample sizes, and tools used, and the girl advantage is often slight and/or not evident at all ages considered. Statistical significance for gender differences appears to depend on the greater individual variability among boys, with respect to girls, which results in a greater number of boys classified as children with poor verbal ability. Biological (e.g., different maturational rates), neuropsychological (e.g., different cognitive strategies in solving tasks), and cultural (e.g., differences in the way parents relate socially to boys and girls) factors appear to interact, to create feedback loops of mutual reinforcement.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据