  Modelling of early language acquisition aims to understand how infants
bootstrap their language skills. The modelling encompasses properties of the
input data used for training the models, the cognitive hypotheses and their
algorithmic implementations being tested, and the evaluation methodologies to
compare models to human data. Recent developments have enabled the use of more
naturalistic training data for computational models. This also motivates
development of more naturalistic tests of model behaviour. A crucial step
towards such an aim is to develop representative speech datasets consisting of
speech heard by infants in their natural environments. However, a major
drawback of such recordings is that they are typically noisy, and it is
currently unclear how the sound quality could affect analyses and modelling
experiments conducted on such data. In this paper, we explore this aspect for
the case of infant-directed speech (IDS) and adult-directed speech (ADS)
analysis. First, we manually and automatically annotated audio quality of
utterances extracted from two corpora of child-centred long-form recordings (in
English and French). We then compared acoustic features of IDS and ADS in an
in-lab dataset and across different audio quality subsets of naturalistic data.
Finally, we assessed how the audio quality and recording environment may change
the conclusions of a modelling analysis using a recent self-supervised learning
model. Our results show that the use of modest and high audio quality
naturalistic speech data result in largely similar conclusions on IDS and ADS
in terms of acoustic analyses and modelling experiments. We also found that an
automatic sound quality assessment tool can be used to screen out useful parts
of long-form recordings for a closer analysis with comparable results to that
of manual quality annotation.
