They call it like they see it: spontaneous naming and attention to shape

Two experiments explore children's spontaneous labeling of novel objects as a method to study early lexical access. The experiments also provide new evidence on children's attention to object shape when labeling objects. In Experiment 1, the spontaneous productions of 21 23- to 28-month-olds (mean 26;28) shown a set of novel, unnamed objects were analyzed both in terms of the specific words said and, via adult judgments, their likely perceptual basis. We found that children's spontaneous names were cued by the perceptual feature of shape. Experiment 2 examines the relation between spontaneous productions, name generalizations in a structured task, and vocabulary development in a group of children between 17 and 24 months of age (mean 21;6). Results indicate that object shape plays an important role in both spontaneous productions and novel noun generalization, but contrary to current hypotheses, children may name objects by shape from the earliest points of productive vocabulary development and this tendency may not be lexically specific.     

Children learn words easier when they are interested in the category to which the word belongs

The overall pattern of vocabulary development is relatively similar across children learning different languages. However, there are considerable differences in the words known to individual children. Historically, this variability has been explained in terms of differences in the input. Here, we examine the alternate possibility that children's individual interest in specific natural categories shapes the words they are likely to learn – a child who is more interested in animals will learn a new animal name easier relative to a new vehicle name. Two‐year‐old German‐learning children (N = 39) were exposed to four novel word–object associations for objects from four different categories. Prior to the word learning task, we measured their interest in the categories that the objects belonged to. Our measure was pupillary change following exposure to familiar objects from these four categories, with increased pupillary change interpreted as increased interest in that category. Children showed more robust learning of word–object associations from categories they were more interested in relative to categories they were less interested in. We further found that interest in the novel objects themselves influenced learning, with distinct influences of both category interest and object interest on learning. These results suggest that children's interest in different natural categories shapes their word learning. This provides evidence for the strikingly intuitive possibility that a child who is more interested in animals will learn novel animal names easier than a child who is more interested in vehicles.     

Late talkers show no shape bias in a novel name extension task

By 2½ years of age, children typically show a shape bias in object naming – that is, they extend object names mostly to new instances with the same shape. The acquisition of a shape bias is related to a marked increase in the rate of object name learning. This study asks whether, conversely, children who do not readily acquire new object names lack a shape bias. Twelve 2- to 3-year-old ‘late talkers’– children whose total vocabularies rank below the 30th percentile for their age – were compared with age-matched children with larger vocabularies in a novel object name extension task. The controls extended novel names across novel objects with the same shape. The late talkers showed no group perceptual bias, but many individuals extended novel names across objects with the same surface texture. The implications of the results both for the role of attentional biases in object name learning and for the etiology of some late talking are discussed.      

The shape of thought

When children learn the name of a novel object, they tend to extend that name to other objects similar in shape – a phenomenon referred to as the shape bias. Does the shape bias stem from learned associations between names and categories of objects, or does it derive from more general properties of children's understanding of language and the world? We argue here for the second alternative, presenting evidence that the shape bias emerges early in development, is not limited to names, and is intimately related to how children make sense of categories.     

How do parents respond to children's questions about the identity of artifacts?

We investigated how parents respond to young children's questions about the identity of artifacts. Children's questions were predominantly ambiguous about whether they were inquiring about name or function, but when their questions were more specific, they were almost always about function. For unfamiliar objects, parents responded with functional information the majority of the time, alone or in addition to names. For atypical members of familiar categories, adults usually responded only with the category name. The results indicate that adults adjust their responses in a way that often provides the information about object kind, specifically functional information in the case of artifacts, that they believe their children are lacking. Such input may contribute to the development of children's concepts and word meanings.     

Statistical regularities in vocabulary guide language acquisition in connectionist models and 15-20-month-olds

This research tested the hypothesis that young children's bias to generalize names for solid objects by shape is the product of statistical regularities among nouns in the early productive vocabulary. Data from a 4-layer Hopfield network suggested that the statistical regularities in the early noun vocabulary are strong enough to create a shape bias, and that the shape bias is overgeneralized to nonsolid stimuli. A 2nd simulation suggested that this overgeneralization is due to the dominance of names for shape-based categories in the early noun vocabulary. Two subsequent longitudinal experiments tested whether it is possible to create word learning biases in children. Children 15-20 months old were given intensive naming experiences with 12 noun categories typical of the types of categories children learn to name early. The children developed a precocious shape bias that was overgeneralized to naming nonsolid substances; they also showed accelerated vocabulary development. Children taught an atypical set of nouns or no new nouns did not develop a shape bias and did not show accelerated vocabulary development.     

Children's reliance on creator's intent in extending names for artifacts

When children learn a name for a novel artifact, they tend to extend the name to other artifacts that share the same shape—a phenomenon known as the shape bias. The present studies investigated an intentional account of this bias. In Study 1, 3-year-olds were shown two objects of the same shape, and were given an explanation for why the objects were the same shape even though they were intended to be different kinds. The shape bias disappeared in children provided with this explanation. In Study2, 3-year-olds were shown triads of objects, and were either given no information about the function of a named target object, told the function that object could fulfill, or told the functions all three objects were intended to fulfill. Only in the third condition did children overcome a shape bias in favor of a function bias when extending the name of the target object. These findings indicate that 3-year-olds' shape bias results from intuitions about what artifacts were intended to be.     

Testing a word is not a test of word learning

Although vocabulary acquisition requires children learn names for multiple things, many investigations of word learning mechanisms teach children the name for only one of the objects presented. This is problematic because it is unclear whether children's performance reflects recall of the correct name–object association or simply selection of the only object that was singled out by being the only object named. Children introduced to one novel name may perform at ceiling as they are not required to discriminate on the basis of the name per se, and appear to rapidly learn words following minimal exposure to a single word. We introduced children to four novel objects. For half the children, only one of the objects was named and for the other children, all four objects were named. Only children introduced to one word reliably selected the target object at test. This demonstration highlights the over-simplicity of one-word learning paradigms and the need for a shift in word learning paradigms where more than one word is taught to ensure children disambiguate objects on the basis of their names rather than their degree of salience.     

Early noun lexicons in English and Japanese.

Previous research suggests that children learning a variety of languages acquire similar early noun vocabularies and do so by similar and universal processes. We report here results from two studies that show differences in the early noun learning of English- and Japanese-speaking children. Experiment 1 examined the relative numbers of animal names and object names in vocabularies of English-speaking and Japanese-speaking children. English-speaking children's vocabularies were heavily lopsided with many more object than animal names whereas Japanese-speaking children's vocabularies were more evenly balanced. Experiment 2 used a novel noun extension task to examine what young children know about the different organizations of animal and artifact categories. The results suggest that early learners of English but not Japanese over-generalize what they know about object categories to animal categories. The role of culture, input and linguistic structure in early noun acquisitions is discussed.     

How children name objects with shoes

Many studies report a shape bias in children's learning of object names. However, one previous study suggests that the shape bias is not the only perceptually based bias displayed by children learning count nouns. Specifically, children attended to texture as well as shape when extending a novel name to novel objects with eyes. Two experiments attempt to extend this finding, asking whether children will also attend to texture in the presence of another cue to animacy—shoes. In Experiment 1, 80 2- and 3-year-olds participated in either a Name generalization or Similarity judgment task. The novel objects were identical except that for half of the children the objects had shoes. In the Similarity condition, children made their judgments by overall similarity. In the Name condition, 2-year-olds extended the novel name by shape across objects both with and without shoes. In contrast, 3-year-olds generalized the novel name by shape when the objects had no shoes but by texture when the objects had shoes. Experiment 2 challenged this finding, using a forced choice procedure and objects that differed from the named exemplar more markedly in shape. Twenty 3-year-olds participated in a Name generalization task, half for objects with shoes, half for objects without shoes. Again, children attended reliably more to texture when the objects had shoes than when they had no shoes. The results are discussed in terms of the development of different perceptually based biases and the relation of such biases to a taxonomic bias in early word learning.     

Comparison Facilitates Children's Learning of Names for Parts

Learning names for parts of objects can be challenging for children, as it requires overcoming their tendency to name whole objects. We test whether comparing items can facilitate learning names for their parts. Applying the structure-mapping theory of comparison leads to two predictions: (a) young children will find it easier to identify a common part between two very similar items than between two dissimilar items (because the similar pair is easier to align); (b) close alignments potentiate far alignments: children will be better able to extend a novel part name to a dissimilar object after having extended it to a similar object. In three studies, 227 preschool children mapped novel part terms to new animals or objects. Both predictions were confirmed. Children more accurately extended novel part terms to objects that were similar to the standard than to objects that were dissimilar (Experiments 1 and 2), and children more accurately extended novel part names to dissimilar objects after having extended them to similar objects (Experiment 3). We conclude that structure-mapping processes can support part learning.     

Learning names for materials: Factors constraining and limiting hypotheses about word meaning

Children's ability to learn new words quickly (Carey, 1978; Dickinson, 1984b; Heibeck & Markman, in press) indicates that they have strategies for constraining hypotheses about word meaning. The initial hypotheses children entertain about the meaning of words that name materials were examined in two studies. The first study examined the effects of linguistic constraint supplied by count/mass syntactic information and of conceptual constraints—Object Bias for Solids (i.e., words applied to solids name objects, not materials; Soja, Carey, & Spelke, 1985), and Substance Bias for Nonsolids (i.e., words applied to nonsolids name materials). A second study investigated the effects of providing more explicit information about word meaning by including the phrase “made of” when words were presented. In both studies, 16 children, aged 3, 4, and 5, were introduced to an object or material and told a name for it in phrases that varied the information provided. They then were shown two items and asked to indicate which was an example of the presentation stimulus. Mass syntax was somewhat effective in helping children map words to material concepts, but conceptual constraints were more important. Children of all ages were poor at learning names for materials when the word referred to unfamiliar objects made of unfamiliar materials, but the phrase “made of” helped reduce the effect of the Object Bias for Solids among 5-year-olds. Age-related developments suggest that acquisition of material names also is affected by improving access to material concepts.     

Learning What to Remember: Vocabulary Knowledge and Children's Memory for Object Names and Features

Although young children can map a novel name to a novel object, it remains unclear what they actually remember about objects when they initially make such a name–object association. In the current study we investigated (1) what children remembered after they were initially introduced to name–object associations and (2) how their vocabulary size and vocabulary structure influenced what they remembered. As a group, children had difficulty remembering each of the features of the original novel objects. Further analyses revealed that differences in vocabulary structure predicted children's ability to remember object features. Specifically, children who produced many names for categories organized by similarity in shape (e.g. ball, cup) had the best memory for newly‐learned objects' features—especially their shapes. In addition, the more features children remembered, the more likely they were to retain the newly learned name–object associations. Vocabulary size, however, was not predictive of children's feature memory or retention. Taken together, these findings demonstrate that children's existing vocabulary structure, rather than simply vocabulary size, influences what they attend to when encountering a new object and subsequently their ability to remember new name–object associations. Copyright © 2015 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

What's in a shape? Children represent shape variability differently than adults when naming objects

Children and adults often generalize a word to objects of the same shape. However, the shape properties on which generalization is based are unknown. We investigated the degree to which two shape dimensions were represented categorically by children and adults when learning names for objects. Multidimensional scaling techniques were used to establish the perceptual similarity of two sets of objects in Experiment 1. In Experiments 2 and 3, children (from 2;8 to 4;5 years of age) and adults participated in two tasks in which they learned a novel name for an exemplar. We then examined how often the novel name was generalized to different objects and to line drawings of the objects. In one task, participants generalized the names from memory; in a second task the exemplar was in front of the participant during generalization. Adults accepted names more often to objects that fell "within" the proposed shape boundaries than to objects that fell "across" the boundaries. Children, however, were just as likely to generalize names to novel objects that fell within as to objects that crossed the boundaries.     

When knowing the name of objects is not enough to categorize them

Two experiments explored 16-month-olds' learning of new nouns, and their use of these nouns to categorize objects. In both experiments, infants were presented with triads of perceptually dissimilar objects, which were given made-up names, two of the objects receiving the same name. Following each training phase, infants were tested on whether: (a) they could use the names to categorize the objects (Experiment 1), or (b) they had actually learned the association between the names and the objects (Experiment 2). Our results show that 16-month-olds can simultaneously learn the name of three objects, but cannot use these newly learned names to categorize the objects in the absence of any other cue to categorization. These results are discussed in light of different hypotheses regarding the way infants come to use names to categorize objects.     

Learning to recognize objects

Abstract - A theory of object recognition requires a theory of shape. Despite considerable empirical and theoretical research, however, a definition of object shape has proved elusive. Two experiments provide new insights by showing that children's object recognition changes dramatically during the period between 17 and 25 months. During this time, children develop the ability to recognize stylized three-dimensional caricatures of known and novel objects. This ability is linked to the number of object names in children's vocabularies, suggesting that category learning may be a driving force behind the developmental changes.     

Monolingual and bilingual children's use of mutual exclusivity in the naming of whole objects

In two experiments, the use of mutual exclusivity in the naming of whole objects was examined in monolingual and bilingual 3- and 6-year-olds. Once an object has a known name, then via principles of mutual exclusivity it is often assumed that a new name given to the object must refer to some part, substance, or other property of the object. However, because bilingual children must suspend mutual exclusivity assumptions between languages, they may be more willing to accept two names for an object within a language. In the current research, the use of mutual exclusivity in the naming of whole objects was found across monolingual and bilingual children, although older bilingual children were significantly less inclined to use mutual exclusivity than were older monolingual children. These results are discussed in terms of differences in monolingual and bilingual children's word learning.