Reference health
Infants listen for more phonetic detail in speech perception than in word-learning tasks
6/6 checkable references clean · checked 2026-08-25
Every reference with a DOI in the deposited reference list resolved to a known work in Crossref or DataCite at the dated check, and none carried a retraction, withdrawal, or removal notice.
6 without a DOI — not checked. A reference deposited without a DOI is never matched by title or guessed at; it stays outside the checked set, and this line discloses that.
The 6 checked references that resolve
resolves10.1002/dev.420150408
Limitations on input as a basis for neural organization and perceptual development: A preliminary theoretical statement
resolves10.1017/S0305000900010023
An examination of similarity neighbourhoods in young children's receptive vocabularies
resolves10.1016/S0163-6383(84)80022-3
Cross-language speech perception: Evidence for perceptual reorganization during the first year of life
The 6 references without a DOI — listed, not checked
no DOI — not checkedKuhl, P. K. in Handbook of Infant Speech Perception Vol. 2(eds Salapatek, P. & Cohen, L.) 275–382 (Academic, New York, (1987)).
no DOI — not checkedJusczyk, P. W. in Handbook of Perception and Cognition, 11: Speech, Language, and Communication(eds Miller, J. L. & Eimas, P. D.) 263–301 (Academic, Orlando, Florida, (1995)).
no DOI — not checkedWerker, J. in Invitation to Cognitive Science: Language(eds Gleitman, L. R. & Liberman, M.) 87–106 (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, (1995)).
no DOI — not checkedSpelke, E. S., Vishton, P. & Van Hofsten, C. in The Cognitive Neurosciences(ed. Gazzaniga, M.) 165–179 (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, (1994)).
no DOI — not checkedWoodward, A. in Twenty-fourth Annual Child Language Research Forum(ed. Clark, E.) 35–45 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, MA, (1993)).
no DOI — not checkedBarton, D. The Development of Communication(eds Waterson, N. & Snow, C.) 255–261 (Wiley, New York, (1978)).
What this badge says. CiteStamped means the CHECKABLE references of this
work were clean at the dated check: each resolved to a known work in a public registry, and none
carried a retraction notice at that time. It says nothing about the quality, findings,
or importance of the work itself, and nothing about references deposited without a DOI.
checked 2026-08-25 — re-checked daily as this page is visited; titles and statuses come from Crossref and DataCite and are not part of the signed record
Embed this badge
Both snippets point at the live badge image and link back to this page. The badge re-renders from the daily check, so an embed never goes stale by more than a day of visits.
<a href="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1038/41102"><img src="https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1038/41102/badge.svg" alt="CiteStamped reference-health badge" width="460" height="64"></a>
[](https://citestamp.com/citestamped/10.1038/41102)