Understanding does baby sign language help speech development is essential for anyone interested in baby and toddler sign language. This comprehensive guide covers everything you need to know, from basic concepts to advanced strategies. By the end of this article, you’ll have the knowledge to make informed decisions and take effective action.
Table of Contents
- What Does Research Say About Baby Sign Language and Speech Development?
- The Real Benefits May Not Be What You Expect
- Selection Bias and the Privilege Problem
- What About Children Who Struggle With Language?
- Early Literacy Connections
- The Scientific Consensus and What It Means for Families
- Conclusion
What Does Research Say About Baby Sign Language and Speech Development?
The most well-known study supporting baby sign language comes from researchers Linda Acredolo and Susan Goodwyn, whose NIH-funded work compared 11-month-old babies using sign language with non-signers. Their findings showed the signing group demonstrated verbal skills approximately three months ahead of their non-signing peers by age two, with advantages persisting at age three. More recently, Indiana University research published in February 2025 suggests that children taught baby sign language tend to develop larger vocabularies and more advanced language skills at earlier ages compared to peers without sign language exposure. However, the research landscape is more complicated than these headline findings suggest.
A 2006 review by the University of Western Ontario analyzed 17 research reports on baby sign language and found that most studies lacked methodological rigor, proper randomization, and adequate control groups. Critics point out that five of the studies came from Goodwyn and Acredolo themselves, with another three from researcher Daniels””raising concerns about the limited researcher base drawing these conclusions. A study by Kirk and colleagues took a more rigorous approach by randomly assigning 20 mothers to use symbolic gestures with their babies from 8 to 20 months. The result: babies in the signing group showed no linguistic benefits compared to the control group. This doesn’t mean signing is useless, but it does suggest the dramatic claims sometimes made about baby sign language may be overstated.
The Real Benefits May Not Be What You Expect
One finding that emerges consistently across studies is that signing mothers tend to be more responsive to their babies’ nonverbal cues overall. This heightened attentiveness may explain some of the positive outcomes attributed to signing. When parents actively look for communication attempts from their babies””whether signed or gestured””they naturally engage in more back-and-forth interaction, which is a well-established driver of language development. This distinction matters for understanding what baby sign language actually offers.
The benefit may stem primarily from increased parent-child interaction rather than anything special about the signs themselves. A parent who commits to teaching baby signs is also committing to focused, repeated communication attempts, eye contact, and attention to subtle cues. Any activity that accomplishes these goals might produce similar results. However, if your family life already includes abundant verbal interaction, responsive communication, and focused attention on your baby, adding sign language may not provide additional measurable benefits. Families should weigh whether the time investment in learning and consistently using signs might be better spent on other forms of enriching interaction that feel more natural to them.
Selection Bias and the Privilege Problem
Critics of baby sign language research raise an important concern about selection bias. Families who choose to teach baby signs tend to be more educated, have more resources, and already engage in communication-rich parenting practices. These same families’ children often perform well developmentally regardless of whether signing is involved. Separating the effects of signing from the effects of privileged, attentive parenting proves extremely difficult in most study designs.
This matters for how parents interpret the research. When a study shows that signing babies have larger vocabularies at age two, the question remains: would these same children have developed similarly impressive vocabularies anyway, given their advantaged starting position? The Kirk study mentioned earlier attempted to address this by random assignment, and notably found no linguistic benefits””suggesting selection bias may indeed explain much of what other studies observed. For parents making decisions, this means tempering expectations. If you choose to sign with your baby, do so because you enjoy the interaction or want a communication tool during the pre-verbal months””not because you expect it to give your child a developmental edge over peers from similar backgrounds.
What About Children Who Struggle With Language?
Baby sign language may offer particular value for children with weak language abilities or developmental delays, though evidence here is also limited. One study found benefits for children struggling with language, but this conclusion rested on observations of only three children””far too small a sample to draw confident conclusions. The logic behind potential benefits for struggling children is intuitive: signing provides an alternative communication channel that may reduce frustration while verbal skills catch up. For children with hearing impairments, developmental delays, or speech disorders, sign language can serve as a bridge to communication rather than a replacement for speech. Parents concerned about their child’s language development should consult with pediatricians or speech-language pathologists rather than relying on baby sign language as an intervention. Signing might be part of a broader support plan, but it should not substitute for professional evaluation when genuine concerns exist. ## How to Approach Baby Sign Language Realistically Parents considering baby sign language face a practical tradeoff: the time and consistency required to teach signs effectively versus the uncertain magnitude of any benefits.
Successful signing requires that caregivers use signs consistently over weeks or months, often before seeing any response from the baby. For some families, this commitment fits naturally into their routines; for others, it becomes another source of parental guilt when implementation proves sporadic. A reasonable approach involves starting with a small number of highly useful signs””such as “milk,” “more,” “all done,” and “help”””and incorporating them naturally into daily routines without pressure. If signing feels forced or stressful, the potential benefits are unlikely to outweigh the costs. If it becomes an enjoyable form of interaction, continue regardless of whether measurable language benefits materialize. Compare this to other early childhood activities: reading to babies clearly benefits language development, and most families find it enjoyable. Signing may or may not provide additional benefits beyond what reading and conversation already offer. Families with limited time might prioritize activities with stronger evidence bases while remaining open to signing if it appeals to them.
Early Literacy Connections
Beyond spoken language, some research suggests baby sign language may support early literacy skills, including letter recognition and phonemic awareness. The Indiana University research from 2025 points to these broader literacy connections, suggesting that the visual and kinesthetic components of signing may reinforce learning in ways that carry over to reading readiness.
This potential connection makes theoretical sense: signing requires attention to visual symbols (the hand shapes), association between symbols and meanings, and the kind of focused attention that supports later academic learning. However, parents should note that these findings are relatively recent and require replication before drawing strong conclusions.
The Scientific Consensus and What It Means for Families
The current scientific consensus holds that parents should neither be strongly encouraged nor discouraged from using baby sign language. No compelling evidence demonstrates significant long-term developmental benefits for typically developing children, but equally importantly, no evidence shows any harm. Signing does not delay speech development””a concern some parents raise but which research does not support.
This balanced conclusion may feel unsatisfying to parents hoping for clear guidance. The practical takeaway is that baby sign language represents a reasonable option for families who find it appealing, rather than a necessary intervention or a waste of time. The 2023 Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research study showing positive correlation between ASL and English vocabulary suggests that at minimum, learning to sign does not compete with or detract from verbal language acquisition.
Conclusion
Baby sign language neither dramatically accelerates speech development nor causes any delays. The most honest summary of current research is that benefits are possible but modest, and may stem largely from increased parent-child interaction rather than signing specifically. Parents who enjoy teaching signs and find it enhances communication with their pre-verbal babies should continue without concern.
Parents who feel pressured to add signing to an already full schedule of enrichment activities can skip it without guilt. The most important factors for speech development remain consistent across the research: responsive parenting, abundant verbal interaction, reading aloud, and attention to children’s communication attempts in whatever form they take. Baby sign language can be part of this picture, but it is not a necessary component, and its presence or absence is unlikely to determine your child’s long-term language outcomes.