Novel labels support 10-month-olds’ attention to novel objects

What is the source of the mutual exclusivity bias whereby infants map novel labels onto novel objects? In an intermodal preferential looking task, we found that novel labels support 10-month-olds’ attention to a novel object over a familiar object. In contrast, familiar labels and a neutral phrase gradually reduced attention to a novel object. Markman (1989, 1990) argued that infants must recall the name of a familiar object to exclude it as the referent of a novel label. We argue that 10-month-olds’ attention is guided by the novelty of objects and labels rather than knowledge of the names for familiar objects. Mutual exclusivity, as a language-specific bias, might emerge from a more general constraint on attention and learning.     

Use of the mutual exclusivity assumption by young word learners

A critical question about early word learning is whether word learning constraints such as mutual exclusivity exist and foster early language acquisition. It is well established that children will map a novel label to a novel rather than a familiar object. Evidence for the role of mutual exclusivity in such indirect word learning has been questioned because: (1) it comes mostly from 2 and 3-year-olds and (2) the findings might be accounted for, not by children avoiding second labels, but by the novel object which creates a lexical gap children are motivated to fill. Three studies addressed these concerns by having only a familiar object visible. Fifteen to seventeen and 18-20-month-olds were selected to straddle the vocabulary spurt. In Study 1, babies saw a familiar object and an opaque bucket as a location to search. Study 2 handed babies the familiar object to play with. Study 3 eliminated an obvious location to search. On the whole, babies at both ages resisted second labels for objects and, with some qualifications, tended to search for a better referent for the novel label. Thus mutual exclusivity is in place before the onset of the naming explosion. The findings demonstrate that lexical constraints enable babies to learn words even under non-optimal conditions--when speakers are not clear and referents are not visible. The results are discussed in relation to an alternative social-pragmatic account.     

Evidence for a form of mutual exclusivity during label acquisition by grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus)?

The authors present context-dependent evidence for a form of mutual exclusivity during label learning by Grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus). For human children, mutual exclusivity refers to their assumption during early word learning that an object has one and only one label. Along with the whole-object assumption (that a label likely refers to an entire object rather than some partial aspect), mutual exclusivity is thought to guide children in initial label acquisition. It may also help children overcome the whole-object assumption by helping them interpret a novel word as something other than an object label, but for young children, any second label for an object can initially be more difficult to acquire than the first. The authors show that Grey parrots quickly learn object labels for items, then have considerable difficulty learning to use color labels with respect to a previously labeled item unless specifically taught to use a color and object label as a pair.     

The role of novelty in early word learning

What mechanism implements the mutual exclusivity bias to map novel labels to objects without names? Prominent theoretical accounts of mutual exclusivity (e.g., Markman, 1989, 1990 ) propose that infants are guided by their knowledge of object names. However, the mutual exclusivity constraint could be implemented via monitoring of object novelty (see Merriman, Marazita, & Jarvis, 1995 ). We sought to discriminate between these contrasting explanations across two preferential looking experiments with 22‐month‐olds. In Experiment 1, infants viewed three objects: one name‐known, two name‐unknown. Of the two name‐unknown objects, one was novel, and the other had been previously familiarized. The infants responded to hearing a novel label by increasing attention only to the novel, name‐unknown object. In a second experiment in which the name‐known object was absent, a novel label increased infants’ attention to a novel object beyond baseline preference for novelty. The experiments provide clear evidence for a novelty‐based mechanism. However, differences in the time course of disambiguation across experiments suggest that novelty processing may be influenced by contextual factors.     

Constraints Children Place on Word Meanings

This paper views lexical acquisition as a problem of induction: Children must figure out the meaning of a given term, given the large number of possible meanings any term could have. If children had to consider, evaluate, and rule out an unlimited number of hypotheses about each word in order to figure out its meaning, learning word meanings would be hopeless. Children must, therefore, be limited in the kinds of hypotheses they consider as possible word meanings. This paper considers three possible constraints on word meanings: (1) The whole object assumption which leads children to interpret novel terms as labels for objects—not parts, substances, or other properties of objects: (2) The taxonomic assumption which leads children to consider labels as referring to objects of like kind, rather than to objects that are thematically related: and (3) The mutual exclusivity assumption which leads children to expect each object to have only one label. Some of the evidence for these constraints is reviewed.     

Effects of knowledge about cross-language equivalents on children's use of mutual exclusivity in interpreting novel labels

Young children seem to assume that words pick out mutually exclusive object categories. This assumption of mutual exclusivity can be useful in word learning, but it is fallible. This study examined the effects of knowledge about cross-language equivalents on children's use of mutual exclusivity in interpreting a novel label coming from a foreign language and in interpreting a novel label within their first language. It was found that 4-year-olds with such knowledge suspended the assumption of mutual exclusivity in interpreting a novel label coming from a foreign language. Furthermore, they were willing to accept multiple labels for an object even within a language, as long as the context suggested that they should do so. In contrast, 3-year-olds did not seem to make use of such knowledge in either case. Thus, it appeared that 4-year-olds could make use of knowledge about language to fine tune the use of mutual exclusivity, but that this seemed to be difficult for 3-year-olds.     

Two-Year-Olds' Appreciation of the Shared Nature of Novel Object Labels

Two-year-olds' appreciation of the shared nature of object labels versus object preferences was examined in 2 studies. A total of 128 24- to 27-month-olds played a finding game with an experimenter during which they were taught a piece of information about a target object in a nonostensive learning context. In Experiment 1, children were presented with a cue signaling the referent of a novel label. In Experiment 2, children were presented with a cue signaling the experimenter's preference for a particular object. Results indicate children appreciate that knowledge of an object's label is shared between 2 different individuals, but object preferences are not.     

Two-year-olds' recognition of hierarchies: Evidence from their interpretation of the semantic relation between object labels

The present studies investigated 2-year-olds' recognition of hierarchies by examining under various conditions the relative frequency with which children interpreted novel and familiar labels for objects as mutually exclusive. Two-year-olds were taught novel labels in one of three ways: (a) inclusive input: “[novel label] is a kind of [familiar label]”; (b) exclusive input: “[novel label] is not a [familiar label]”; or (c) (Study 2) no relational input. The referents of the novel and familiar labels were taxonomically either: (a) strongly related (e.g., a fighter airplane and a passenger airplane), or (b) weakly related (e.g., a paint brush and a toothbrush). Children were less likely to interpret the labels as picking out mutually exclusive categories when: (a) the labels were introduced with the inclusive input; and (b) the referents of the labels were taxonomically strongly related. This modulation of mutual exclusivity interpretations in response to the various hierarchical relations instantiated in the stimuli and input provides evidence for 2-year-olds' emerging capacity to recognize hierarchical relations.     

Parallels Between Action‐Object Mapping and Word‐Object Mapping in Young Children

Across a series of four experiments with 3‐ to 4‐year‐olds we demonstrate how cognitive mechanisms supporting noun learning extend to the mapping of actions to objects. In Experiment 1 (n = 61) the demonstration of a novel action led children to select a novel, rather than a familiar object. In Experiment 2 (n = 78) children exhibited long‐term retention of novel action‐object mappings and extended these actions to other category members. In Experiment 3 (n = 60) we showed that children formed an accurate sensorimotor record of the novel action. In Experiment 4 (n = 54) we demonstrate limits on the types of actions mapped to novel objects. Overall these data suggest that certain aspects of noun mapping share common processing with action mapping and support a domain‐general account of word learning.     

Get by With a Little Help From a Word: Multimodal Input Facilitates 26-Month-Olds' Ability to Map and Generalize Arbitrary Gestural Labels

In the early stages of word learning, children demonstrate considerable flexibility in the type of symbols they will accept as object labels. However, around the 2nd year, as children continue to gain language experience, they become focused on more conventional symbols (e.g., words) as opposed to less conventional symbols (e.g., gestures). During this period of symbolic narrowing, the degree to which children are able to learn other types of labels, such as arbitrary gestures, remains a topic of debate. Thus, the purpose of the current set of experiments was to determine whether a multimodal label (word + gesture) could facilitate 26-month-olds' ability to learn an arbitrary gestural label. We hypothesized that the multimodal label would exploit children's focus on words thereby increasing their willingness to interpret the gestural label. To test this hypothesis, we conducted two experiments. In Experiment 1, 26-month-olds were trained with a multimodal label (word + gesture) and tested on their ability to map and generalize both the arbitrary gesture and the multimodal label to familiar and novel objects. In Experiment 2, 26-month-olds were trained and tested with only the gestural label. The findings revealed that 26-month-olds are able to map and generalize an arbitrary gesture when it is presented multimodally with a word, but not when it is presented in isolation. Furthermore, children's ability to learn the gestural labels was positively related to their reported productive vocabulary, providing additional evidence that children's focus on words actually helped, not hindered, their gesture learning.     

Relative sensitivity of the mutual exclusivity and novel-name-nameless category assumptions

The mutual exclusivity (ME) assumption states that children affix a novel label to only one unfamiliar object, while the novel-name-nameless category (N3C) assumption states that children affix a novel label to multiple unfamiliar objects. To compare the relative sensitivity of the two assumptions, two types of tasks, with two trials in each, were given to 5-year-olds. In the first trial of each task, all children selected only the unfamiliar object for a novel label, which was consistent with the ME assumption. For the task which did not have the same unfamiliar object in the two trials, 94% of the children selected the object with the same shape but black-white reversed image in the second trial, which was consistent with the N3C assumption. For the task which had the same unfamiliar object in the two trials, 43% of the children selected the same object in the second trial, which was consistent with the ME assumption, and 48% of them selected the object with the same shape but reversed image, which was consistent with the N3C assumption. The findings suggest that the ME and N3C assumptions can be flexibly applied to children's word learning.     

Is this still called a dog? 18‐month‐olds' generalization of familiar labels to unusual objects

In two experiments the flexibility of 18‐month‐olds' extension of familiar object labels was investigated using the intermodal preferential looking paradigm. The first experiment tested whether infants consider intact and incomplete objects as equally acceptable referents for familiar labels. Infants looked equally long at the intact and incomplete objects whether or not a label was presented. In the second experiment, infants were requested to find the referent of a target word among an incomplete target and an intact distracter or an intact target and an incomplete distracter. The incomplete objects were missing a large or small part. Infants looked longer at the incomplete target, even when large or small parts were deleted. Taken together, these findings suggest that infants do not hold a strong shape bias when generalizing familiar words. Copyright © 2002 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

Rapid fast-mapping abilities in 2-year-olds

Learning a new word consists of two primary tasks that have often been conflated into a single process: referent selection, in which a child must determine the correct referent of a novel label, and referent retention, which is the ability to store this newly formed label-object mapping in memory for later use. In addition, children must be capable of performing these tasks rapidly and repeatedly as they are frequently exposed to novel words during the course of natural conversation. Here we used a preferential pointing task to investigate 2-year-olds’ (N = 72) ability to infer the referent of a novel noun from a single ambiguous exposure and their ability to retain this mapping over time. Children were asked to identify the referent of a novel label on six critical trials distributed throughout the course of a 10-min study involving many familiar and novel objects. On these critical trials, images of a known object and a novel object (e.g., a ball and a nameless artifact constructed in the laboratory) appeared on two computer screens and a voice asked children to “point at the _____ [e.g., glark].” Following label onset, children were allowed only 3 s during which to infer the correct referent, point at it, and potentially store this new word-object mapping. In a final posttest trial, all previously labeled novel objects appeared and children were asked to point to one of them (e.g., “Can you find the glark?”). To succeed, children needed to have initially mapped the novel labels correctly and retained these mappings over the course of the study. Despite the difficult demands of the current task, children successfully identified the target object on the retention trial. We conclude that 2-year-olds are able to fast map novel nouns during a brief single exposure under ambiguous labeling conditions.     

Learning words: children disregard some pragmatic information that conflicts with mutual exclusivity

Children tend to infer that when a speaker uses a new label, the label refers to an unlabeled object rather than one they already know the label for. Does this inference reflect a default assumption that words are mutually exclusive? Or does it instead reflect the result of a pragmatic reasoning process about what the speaker intended? In two studies, we distinguish between these possibilities. Preschoolers watched as a speaker pointed toward (Study 1) or looked at (Study 2) a familiar object while requesting the referent for a new word (e.g. ‘Can you give me the blicket?’). In both studies, despite the speaker's unambiguous behavioral cue indicating an intent to refer to a familiar object, children inferred that the novel label referred to an unfamiliar object. These results suggest that children expect words to be mutually exclusive even when a speaker provides some kinds of pragmatic evidence to the contrary.     

To see or not to see: infants prefer to follow the gaze of a reliable looker

In two experiments, we examined whether 14‐month‐olds understand the subjective nature of gaze. In the first experiment, infants first observed an experimenter express happiness as she looked inside a container that either contained a toy (reliable looker condition) or was empty (unreliable looker condition). Then, infants had to follow the same experimenter's gaze to a target object located either behind or in front of a barrier. Infants in the reliable looker condition followed the experimenter's gaze behind the barrier more often than infants in the unreliable looker condition, whereas both groups followed the experimenter's gaze to the target object located in front of the barrier equally often. In the second experiment, infants did not generalize their knowledge about the unreliability of a looker to a second ‘naïve’ looker. These findings suggest that 14‐month‐old infants adapt their gaze following as a function of their past experience with the looker.     

Class matters: 12‐month‐olds’ word–object associations privilege content over function words

A fundamental step in learning words is the development of an association between a sound pattern and an element in the environment. Here we explore the nature of this associative ability in 12‐month‐olds, examining whether it is constrained to privilege particular word forms over others. Forty‐eight infants were presented with sets of novel English content‐like word–object pairings (e.g. fep) or novel English function‐like word–object (e.g. iv) pairings until they habituated. Results indicated that infants associated novel content‐like words, but not the novel function‐like words, with novel objects. These results demonstrate that the mechanism with which basic word–object associations are formed is remarkably sophisticated by the onset of productive language. That is, mere associative pairings are not sufficient to form mappings. Rather the system requires well‐formed noun‐like words to co‐occur with objects in order for the linkages to arise.     

Adoption of an internal viewpoint following presentations of plan‐view diagrams and maps

This study investigated people's ability to adopt novel imagined viewpoints after studying plan‐view diagrams and maps. In two experiments, university students were presented with a plan‐view diagram of a character surrounded by nearby objects (Expt 1) or a character within a map of a multi‐level shopping centre (Expt 2). Subsequently, participants' spatial knowledge of the diagrams/maps was tested by asking them about the location of six salient objects/places. In both experiments, the analyses of participants' spatial judgments suggested that they had adopted an imagined viewpoint internal to the character. The findings add to our understanding of imagined viewpoint switches along the vertical axis of space.     

Actions speak louder than words: Differences in memory flexibility between monolingual and bilingual 18‐month‐olds

Bilingual infants from 6‐ to 24‐months of age are more likely to generalize, flexibly reproducing actions on novel objects significantly more often than age‐matched monolingual infants are. In the current study, we examine whether the addition of novel verbal labels enhances memory generalization in a perceptually complex imitation task. We hypothesized that labels would provide an additional retrieval cue and aid memory generalization for bilingual infants. Specifically, we hypothesized that bilinguals might be more likely than monolinguals to map multiple perceptual features onto a novel label and therefore show enhanced generalization. Eighty‐seven 18‐month‐old monolingual and bilingual infants were randomly assigned to one of two experimental conditions or a baseline control condition. In the experimental conditions, either no label or a novel label was added during demonstration and again at the beginning of the test session. After a 24‐hr delay, infants were tested with the same stimulus set to test cued recall and with a perceptually different but functionally equivalent stimulus set to test memory generalization. Bilinguals performed significantly above baseline on both cued recall and memory generalization in both experimental conditions, whereas monolinguals performed significantly above baseline only on cued recall in both experimental conditions. These findings show a difference between monolinguals and bilinguals in memory generalization and suggest that generalization differences between groups may arise from visual perceptual processing rather than linguistic processing. A video abstract of this article can be viewed at https://youtu.be/yXB4pM3fF2k     

Lexical leverage: category knowledge boosts real‐time novel word recognition in 2‐year‐olds

Recent research suggests that infants tend to add words to their vocabulary that are semantically related to other known words, though it is not clear why this pattern emerges. In this paper, we explore whether infants leverage their existing vocabulary and semantic knowledge when interpreting novel label–object mappings in real time. We initially identified categorical domains for which individual 24‐month‐old infants have relatively higher and lower levels of knowledge, irrespective of overall vocabulary size. Next, we taught infants novel words in these higher and lower knowledge domains and then asked if their subsequent real‐time recognition of these items varied as a function of their category knowledge. While our participants successfully acquired the novel label–object mappings in our task, there were important differences in the way infants recognized these words in real time. Namely, infants showed more robust recognition of high (vs. low) domain knowledge words. These findings suggest that dense semantic structure facilitates early word learning and real‐time novel word recognition.     

Infants' reasoning about opaque and transparent occluders in an individuation task

Two experiments document that conceptual knowledge influences 3-year-olds' extension of novel words. In Experiment 1, when objects were described as having conceptual properties typical of artifacts, children extended novel labels for these objects on the basis of shape alone. When the very same objects were described as having conceptual properties typical of animate kinds, children extended novel labels for these objects on the basis of both shape and texture. Moreover, providing a salient perceptual cue (Experiment 2) did not interfere with children's reliance on conceptual information in extending novel words: when an object with eyes was labeled with a novel word in the context of a story describing the object as an artifact, children extended the label on the basis of shape alone (i.e. as though the object were an artifact). These results, which challenge directly the position that 'dumb attentional mechanisms' can account for word learning, stand as evidence for the central role of conceptual information in mapping words to meaning.