Psychological scientists have become increasingly concerned with issues related to methodology and replicability, and infancy researchers in particular face specific challenges related to replicability: For example, high-powered studies are difficult to conduct, testing conditions vary across labs, and different labs have access to different infant populations. Addressing these concerns, we report on a large-scale, multisite study aimed at (a) assessing the overall replicability of a single theoretically important phenomenon and (b) examining methodological, cultural, and developmental moderators. We focus on infants’ preference for infant-directed speech (IDS) over adult-directed speech (ADS). Stimuli of mothers speaking to their infants and to an adult in North American English were created using seminaturalistic laboratory-based audio recordings. Infants’ relative preference for IDS and ADS was assessed across 67 laboratories in North America, Europe, Australia, and Asia using the three common methods for measuring infants’ discrimination (head-turn preference, central fixation, and eye tracking). The overall meta-analytic effect size (Cohen’s d) was 0.35, 95% confidence interval = [0.29, 0.42], which was reliably above zero but smaller than the meta-analytic mean computed from previous literature (0.67). The IDS preference was significantly stronger in older children, in those children for whom the stimuli matched their native language and dialect, and in data from labs using the head-turn preference procedure. Together, these findings replicate the IDS preference but suggest that its magnitude is modulated by development, native-language experience, and testing procedure.

Code-switching is a common phenomenon in bilingual communities, but little is known about bilingual parents’ code-switching when speaking to their infants. In a pre-registered study, we identified instances of code-switching in day-long at-home audio recordings of 21 French–English bilingual families in Montreal, Canada, who provided recordings when their infant was 10 and 18 months old. Overall, rates of infant-directed code-switching were low, averaging 7 times per hour (6 times per 1,000 words) at 10 months and increasing to 28 times per hour (18 times per 1,000 words) at 18 months. Parents code-switched more between sentences than within a sentence; this pattern was even more pronounced when infants were 18 months than when they were 10 months. The most common apparent reasons for code-switching were to bolster their infant's understanding and to teach vocabulary words. Combined, these results suggest that bilingual parents code-switch in ways that support successful bilingual language acquisition.

Adults show a native language advantage for talker identification, which has been interpreted as evidence that phonological knowledge mediates talker learning. However, infants also show a native language benefit for talker discrimination, suggesting that sensitivity to linguistic structure due to systematic language exposure promotes talker learning, even in the absence of functional phonological knowledge or language comprehension. We tested this hypothesis by comparing two groups of English-monolingual adults on their ability to learn English and French voices. One group resided in Montréal with regular exposure to spoken French; the other resided in Storrs, Connecticut and did not have French exposure. Montréal residents showed faster learning and better retention for the French voices compared to their Storrs-residing peers. These findings demonstrate that systematic exposure to a foreign language bolsters talker learning in that language, expanding the gradient effect of language experience on talker learning to perceptual learning that precedes sentence comprehension.

Examining how bilingual infants experience their dual language input is important for understanding bilingual language acquisition. To assess these language experiences, researchers typically conduct language interviews with caregivers. However, little is known about the reliability of these parent reports in describing how bilingual children actually experience dual language input. Here, we explored the quantitative nature of dual language input to bilingual infants. Furthermore, we described some of the heterogeneity of bilingual exposure in a sample of French–English bilingual families. Participants were 21 families with a 10‐month‐old infant residing in Montréal, Canada. First, we conducted language interviews with the caregivers. Then, each family completed three full‐day recordings at home using the Language Environment Analysis recording system. Results showed that children’s proportion exposure to each language was consistent across the two measurement approaches, indicating that parent reports are reliable for assessing a bilingual child’s language experiences. Further exploratory analyses revealed three unique findings: (a) there can be considerable variability in the absolute amount of input among infants hearing the same proportion of input, (b) infants can hear different proportions of language input when considering infant‐directed versus overheard speech, (c) proportion of language input can vary by day, depending on who is caring for the infant. We conclude that collecting naturalistic recordings is complementary to parent‐report measures for assessing infant’s language experiences and for establishing bilingual profiles.