Estimating infants' language exposure: A comparison of random and volume sampling from daylong recordings collected in a bilingual community.

In North America, the characteristics of a child's language environment predict language outcomes. For example, differences in bilingual language exposure, exposure to electronic media, and exposure to child-directed speech (CDS) relate to children's language growth. Recently, these predictors have been studied through the use of daylong recordings, followed by manual annotation of audio samples selected from these recordings. Using a dataset of daylong recordings collected from bilingually raised infants in the United States as an example, we ask whether two of the most commonly used sampling methods, random sampling and sampling based on high adult speech, differ from each other with regard to estimating the frequencies of specific language behaviors. Daylong recordings from 37 Spanish-English speaking families with infants between 4 and 22 months of age were analyzed. From each child's recording, samples were extracted in two ways (at random/based on high adult speech) and then annotated for Language (Spanish/English/Mixed), CDS, Electronic Media, Social Context, Turn-Taking, and Infant Babbling. Correlation and agreement analyses were performed, in addition to paired sample t-tests, to assess how the choice of one or the other sampling method may affect the estimates. For most behaviors studied, correlation and agreement between the two sampling methods was high (Pearson r values between 0.79 and 0.99 for 16 of 17 measures; Intraclass Correlation Coefficient values between 0.78 and 0.99 for 13 of 17 measures). However, interesting between-sample differences also emerged: the degree of language mixing, the amount of CDS, and the number of conversational turns were all significantly higher when sampling was performed based on high adult speech compared to random sampling. By contrast, the presence of electronic media and one-on-one social contexts was higher when sampling was performed at random. We discuss advantages of choosing one sampling technique over the other, depending on the research question and variables at hand.