So I tried to find "language". The only hit was "language development". This turns out to have a handful of links, which are factors that have been found to hav

So I tried to find "language". The only hit was "language development". This turns out to have a handful of links, which are factors that have been found to have a bit of influence on language development. No idea in what direction, and quite a few from what appears to be the same source. But the source article is not cited. Why? The extremely limited information that is available suggests some kind of self-reporting, which is, as we all know, highly unreliable. But, with a bit of searching, I did find the source. It's some random overview article from Family Matters (issue 91, 2012), a publication of the Australian government. It is based on survey data. It doesn't even seem to be peer-reviewed (which is the lowest bar in scientific publishing, IMO), and seems to contain all the classical ingredients that gave us the replication crisis (NHST, high N, just throwing everything in a GLM, assuming absence of significance is absence of causality, and that's just superficial reading). On the other hand, every plain bit of knowledge on language development is missing. Where is the part that relates language development to the actual process, or even the child's parents or guardians, the influence of multilingualism, or the multitude of other potential factors? Not to be found. Adding them in the current style will not overcome the problems. I've got a bunch of articles on a specific (language-related) topic which reach opposite conclusions. I'm sure they exist for language development, too. "The System", as it is now, will definitely, 100% lead anyone trying to understand language development to the wrong conclusions.