Interaction structure constrains the emergence of conventions in group communication.

Real-world communication frequently requires language producers to address more than one comprehender at once, yet most psycholinguistic research focuses on one-on-one communication. As the audience size grows, interlocutors face new challenges that do not arise in dyads. They must consider multiple perspectives and weigh multiple sources of feedback to build shared understanding. Here, we ask which properties of the group's interaction structure facilitate successful communication. We used a repeated reference game paradigm in which directors instructed between one and five matchers to choose specific targets out of a set of abstract figures. Across 313 games (N = 1,319 participants), we manipulated several key constraints on the group's interaction, including the amount of feedback that matchers could give to directors and the availability of peer interaction between matchers. Across groups of different sizes and interaction constraints, describers produced increasingly efficient utterances and matchers made increasingly accurate selections. Critically, however, we found that smaller groups and groups with less-constrained interaction structures ("thick channels") showed stronger convergence to group-specific conventions than large groups with constrained interaction structures ("thin channels"), which struggled with convention formation. Overall, these results shed light on the core structural factors that enable communication to thrive in larger groups.

Peekbank: An open, large-scale repository for developmental eye-tracking data of children's word recognition.

The ability to rapidly recognize words and link them to referents is central to children's early language development. This ability, often called word recognition in the developmental literature, is typically studied in the looking-while-listening paradigm, which measures infants' fixation on a target object (vs. a distractor) after hearing a target label. We present a large-scale, open database of infant and toddler eye-tracking data from looking-while-listening tasks. The goal of this effort is to address theoretical and methodological challenges in measuring vocabulary development. We first present how we created the database, its features and structure, and associated tools for processing and accessing infant eye-tracking datasets. Using these tools, we then work through two illustrative examples to show how researchers can use Peekbank to interrogate theoretical and methodological questions about children's developing word recognition ability.

Conducting Developmental Research Online vs. In-Person: A Meta-Analysis.

An increasing number of psychological experiments with children are being conducted using online platforms, in part due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Individual replications have compared the findings of particular experiments online and in-person, but the general effect of data collection method on data collected from children is still unknown. Therefore, the goal of the current meta-analysis is to estimate the average difference in effect size for developmental studies conducted online compared to the same studies conducted in-person. Our pre-registered analysis includes 211 effect sizes calculated from 30 papers with 3282 children, ranging in age from four months to six years. The estimated effect size for studies conducted online was slightly smaller than for their counterparts conducted in-person, a difference of d = -.05, but this difference was not significant, 95% CI = [-.17, .07]. We examined several potential moderators of the effect of online testing, including the role of dependent measure (looking vs verbal), online study method (moderated vs unmoderated), and age, but none of these were significant. The literature to date thus suggests-on average-small differences in results between in-person and online experimentation.

Eleven years of student replication projects provide evidence on the correlates of replicability in psychology.

Cumulative scientific progress requires empirical results that are robust enough to support theory construction and extension. Yet in psychology, some prominent findings have failed to replicate, and large-scale studies suggest replicability issues are widespread. The identification of predictors of replication success is limited by the difficulty of conducting large samples of independent replication experiments, however: most investigations reanalyse the same set of 170 replications. We introduce a new dataset of 176 replications from students in a graduate-level methods course. Replication results were judged to be successful in 49% of replications; of the 136 where effect sizes could be numerically compared, 46% had point estimates within the prediction interval of the original outcome (versus the expected 95%). Larger original effect sizes and within-participants designs were especially related to replication success. Our results indicate that, consistent with prior reports, the robustness of the psychology literature is low enough to limit cumulative progress by student investigators.