Context effects on lexical choice and lexical activation

Speakers are regularly confronted with the choice among lexical alternatives when referring to objects, including basic-level names (e.g., car) and subordinate-level names (e.g., Beetle). Which of these names is eventually selected often depends on contextual factors. The present article reports a series of picture-word interference experiments that explored how the designated target name (basic level vs. subordinate level) and contextual constraints rendering the name alternative either appropriate or inappropriate affect lexical activation and lexical choice. The experimental data demonstrate clear context effects on the eventual lexical choice. However, they also show that alternative nonselected object names are phonologically activated, even if a constraining context makes these alternative names currently inappropriate.     

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.     

Sources of Disagreement in Object Naming

Two experiments examined the processing of objects with low name agreement. Experiment I compared naming latencies for objects with three different types of name disagreement to those for matched control objects with very high name agreement. Objects with low name agreement due to abbreviations (e.g. phone) were named no more slowly than were control objects. Objects with multiple names (e.g. couch, sofa, settee) and objects often given incorrect names (e.g. spider for ant) took longer to name correctly than did matched controls. These results were confirmed in a second naming experiment using a revised set of high-name-agreement control stimuli. In Experiment 2, subjects carried out an object decision task using the revised stimulus set. Subjects could recognize objects with multiple names as quickly as those with high name agreement. Objects often given incorrect names were recognized by subjects more slowly than were high-agreement matched stimuli. The pattern of data suggests that the delay in naming latency due to the availability of more than one correct name arises after structural recognition. In contrast, the slowed naming of objects often misnamed would seem to originate from difficulties encountered at or before the structural stage of recognition.     

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.     

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.     

Developmental Differences in the Naming of Contextually Non-Categorical Objects

This study investigates the naming process of contextually non-categorical objects in children from 3 to 9 plus 13-year-olds. 112 children participated in the study. Children were asked to narrate a story individually while looking at Mercer Mayer’s textless, picture book Frog, where are you? The narratives were audio recorded and transcribed. Texts were analyzed to find out how children at different ages name contextually non-categorical objects, tree and its parts in this case. Our findings revealed that increasing age in children is a positive factor in naming objects that are parts or extended forms of an object which itself constitutes a basic category in a certain context. Younger children used categorical names more frequently to refer to parts or disfigured forms of the object than older children and adults while older children and adults used specified names to refer to the parts or extended forms of the categorical names.     

A Mutually Facilitative Relationship Between Learning Names and Learning Concepts in Preschool Children: The Case of Artifacts

Two studies investigated the relationship between learning names and learning concepts in preschool children. More specifically, we focused on the relationship between learning the names and learning the intended functions of artifacts, given that the intended function of an artifact is generally thought to constitute core conceptual information about an artifact's category. We asked whether learning the intended function of a novel artifact facilitates retention of its name and whether learning the name of a novel artifact prompts the search for information about its intended function. In Experiment 1, 3- and 4-year-old children better retained the names of novel artifacts when the intended functions of these artifacts were revealed. The comparison condition involved providing perceptually relevant and conceptually irrelevant information about the objects. In Experiment 2, 4-year-old children who were provided with the names of novel artifacts were more likely to seek out information about the objects' functions than children provided with conceptually irrelevant information about the artifacts. Together, the studies demonstrate the intimate and mutually facilitative relationship between names and concepts in young children.     

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.     

Conversation and convention: Enduring influences on name choice for common objects

The name chosen for an object is influenced by both short-term history (e.g., speaker-addressee pacts) and long-term history (e.g., the language's naming pattern for the domain). But these influences must somehow be linked. We propose that names adopted through speaker-addressee collaboration have influences that carry beyond the original context. To test this hypothesis, we adapted the standard referential communication task. The first director of each matching session was a confederate who introduced one of two possible names for each object. The director role then rotated to naive participants. The participants later rated name preference for the introduced and alternative names for each object. They also rated object typicality or similarity to each named category. The name that was initially introduced influenced later name use and preference, even for participants who had not heard the name from the original director. Typicality and similarity showed lesser effects from the names originally introduced. Name associations built in one context appear to influence retrieval and use of names in other contexts, but they have reduced impact on nonlinguistic object knowledge. These results support the notion that stable conventions for object names within a linguistic community may arise from local interactions, and they demonstrate how different populations of speakers may come to have a shared understanding of objects' nonlinguistic properties but different naming patterns.     

Semantic impairment and anomia in Alzheimer''s disease

Impairment in naming visually presented objects was investigated in patients with a clinical diagnosis of Alzheimer's disease. Impaired object naming correlated with difficulty listing the names of objects from a specified semantic category and with erroneous selection of words semantically related to the correct names for objects in a name recognition test. These results suggest that patients with Alzheimer's disease have a semantic impairment characterized by inability to distinguish among objects that are members of the same semantic category, and that this impairment is associated with difficulty producing the names for objects. Semantic impairment was present in patients with normal ability to discriminate visually presented shapes, indicating that the semantic deficit in Alzheimer's disease occurs independently of abnormalities of visuospatial function. Patients tended to make errors on the same items in both confrontation naming and name recognition tests, suggesting that the semantic impairment in Alzheimer's disease involves loss of information about specific objects and their names.     

Prosody and lemma selection

In three picture-naming experiments, we examined the effect of prosodic context on the synonyms people use to name pictures in Mandarin Chinese. This was done without time pressure. The results showed that when monosyllabic and bisyllabic synonyms (e.g., hen/chicken) were embedded in a context of pictures with either bisyllabic or trisyllabic names, participants gave bisyllabic responses to the synonyms more often than they did in a condition without such a context. The difference was very similar in magnitude in both the bisyllabic and trisyllabic contextual conditions. These results suggest that people are biased toward using synonyms that have numbers of syllables equal or similar to those of the prosodic context. If it is assumed that prosodic effects originate at a stage of processing beyond the lemma level, then this suggests either that multiple phonological forms of synonyms can be activated or that there is feedback from prosodic processing that influences lemma selection.     

Color-object interference in young children: A Stroop effect in children 3½-6½ years old

The Stroop color–word task cannot be administered to children who are unable to read. However, our color–object Stroop task can. One hundred and sixty-eight children of 3½–6½ years (50% female; 24 children at each 6-month interval) were shown line drawings of familiar objects in a color that was congruent (e.g., an orange carrot), incongruent (e.g., a green carrot), or neutral (for objects having no canonical color [e.g., a red book]), and abstract shapes, each drawn in one of six colors. Half the children were asked to name the color in which each object was drawn, and half were to name each object. Children's predominant tendency was to say what the object was; when instructed to do otherwise they were slower and less accurate. Children were faster and more accurate at naming the color of a stimulus when the form could not be named (abstract shape) than when it could, even if in its canonical color. The heightened interference to color-naming versus object-naming was not due to lack of familiarity with color names or group differences: Children in the color condition were as fast and accurate at naming the colors of abstract shapes as were children in the form condition at naming familiar objects.     

The role of competition in word learning via referent selection

Previous research suggests that competition among the objects present during referent selection influences young children’s ability to learn words in fast mapping tasks. The present study systematically explored this issue with 30‐month‐old children. Children first received referent selection trials with a target object and either two, three or four competitor objects. Then, after a short delay, children were tested on their ability to retain the newly fast‐mapped names. Overall, the number of competitors did not affect children’s ability to form the initial name–object mappings. However, only children who encountered few competitors during referent selection demonstrated significant levels of retention. Results and implications are discussed in terms of the role of competition in studies of children’s fast mapping. The relationship between referent selection and full word learning is also discussed.     

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.     

The Effects of Distractor Words on Naming Pictures at the Subordinate Level

Three experiments are reported in which participants are asked to name pictures at the subordinate level (e.g. POODLE) whilst ignoring a distractor word. In Experiment 1, the distractor words included the names of other exemplars from the same basic-level category (e.g. spaniel). Naming latencies were prolonged in this condition, relative to unrelated conditions. In Experiment 2, the distractor words included the correct basic level names (e.g. dog) and the names of related basic level objects (e.g. cat). Subordinate naming latencies were faster in these conditions than in unrelated conditions, suggesting that basic level names can be eliminated as competitors and that it can even be useful to have simultaneous activation of the correct basic level representation when retrieving subordinate names. Finally, Experiment 3 showed that when the names of subordinate objects from a related basic-level category (e.g. koala) are printed on objects, subordinate naming latencies are again delayed when compared with unrelated conditions. The results are discussed with reference to current models of object name retrieval.     

Testing effects for common versus proper names

The present study examines the testing effect as a function of item meaningfulness. In Experiments 1 and 2 participants studied lists of words that could serve as proper names or occupations (e.g., Mr Baker or baker), with the items given in a name context for one group and an occupation context for a second group. During an intervening phase participants restudied some items and were given a cued recall test (Experiment 1) or a free recall test (Experiment 2) on other items. On a final free recall test memory was better for tested items than studied items in both the name and occupation contexts. Experiment 3 followed the same procedure as Experiment 1, except that participants studied lists of proper names that do not have alternative uses in the English language (e.g., Mr Anderson) or studied concrete nouns (e.g., letter). Tested items were better remembered on a final test than studied items, and there was no interaction with type of study material. These results show that the testing effect extends to proper names, material that is commonly assumed to differ from common names on several dimensions.     

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.     

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.     

What's new? Children prefer novelty in referent selection

Determining the referent of a novel name is a critical task for young language learners. The majority of studies on children’s referent selection focus on manipulating the sources of information (linguistic, contextual and pragmatic) that children can use to solve the referent mapping problem. Here, we take a step back and explore how children’s endogenous biases towards novelty and their own familiarity with novel objects influence their performance in such a task. We familiarized 2-year-old children with previously novel objects. Then, on novel name referent selection trials children were asked to select the referent from three novel objects: two previously seen and one completely novel object. Children demonstrated a clear bias to select the most novel object. A second experiment controls for pragmatic responding and replicates this finding. We conclude, therefore, that children’s referent selection is biased by previous exposure and children’s endogenous bias to novelty.