New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Hesitant Speech Helps Kids, Um, Learn

Filled pauses direct toddlers' attention to new words

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Parents never want their tots to learn to fumble over words, but they need not worry about their own “uhs” and “ums”—­such filled pauses may actu­­ally improve kids’ ability to pick up language.

Such vocal hesitations, called dis­fluencies, tend to occur before we use a word that is infrequent or unfamiliar in our speech. They also precede words used for the first time in a conversation. Disfluencies keep adults tuned in and help them process the real words that come next.

Even infants can distinguish between fluent and disfluent speech, research at Brown Univer­sity has shown. New experiments at the University of Rochester suggest that around the age of two, children make an association between the disfluencies they hear and the likelihood that new words will follow them.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


In the study, kids aged 16 to 32 months sat on their parent’s lap in front of a computer monitor that showed images of paired objects, one recognizable (such as a ball) and one imaginary but equally colorful.

The first time a pair appeared, a voice from the computer said, “I see the ball.” The second time it said, “Ooh, what a nice ball.” The third time it instructed the children to look at one of the objects in the pair, using a made-up word for the invented object such as “gorp.”

During this third step, some­times the voice said simply, “Look! Look at the ball,” or “Look! Look at the gorp.” In other trials, the sentence included a disfluency: “Look! Look at the, uh, ball,” or “Look! Look at the, uh, gorp.”

When kids heard the disfluency, they paid significantly more attention to the unfamiliar object for the next two seconds—before the computer finished the sentence with either “ball” or “gorp.” During the “fluent” trials, when the com­puter did not say “the, uh,” the children were no more likely to fixate on one object over the other.

The results suggest that disfluencies help kids follow a conversation, says Celeste Kidd, a graduate student who co-authored the study (published online in April in the journal Developmental Science). “We don’t know whether they’re reasoning about the speaker’s intentions, which is a pretty sophisti­cated understanding, or whether they just notice an association between ‘uh’ and ‘um’ and objects they don’t know the name of,” she says.

Either way, parents can relax and speak normally, ums and all—what seem like verbal stumbles are actually useful signals that tell youngsters to tune in.

Jordan Lite is a journalist based in New York City.

More by Jordan Lite
SA Mind Vol 22 Issue 4This article was published with the title “Hesitant Speech Helps Kids, Um, Learn” in SA Mind Vol. 22 No. 4 (), p. 8
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0911-8b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe