Object name Learning Provides On-the-Job Training for Attention

By the age of 3, children easily learn to name new objects, extending new names for unfamiliar objects by similarity in shape. Two experiments tested the proposal that experience in learning object names tunes children's attention to the properties relevant for naming—in the present case, to the property of shape—and thus facilitates the learning of more object names. In Experiment 1, a 9-week longitudinal study, 17-month-old children who repeatedly played with and heard names for members of unfamiliar object categories well organized by shape formed the generalization that only objects with similar shapes have the same name. Trained children also showed a dramatic increase in acquisition of new object names outside of the laboratory during the course of the study. Experiment 2 replicated these findings and showed that they depended on children's learning both a coherent category structure and object names. Thus, children who learn specific names for specific things in categories with a common organizing property—in this case, shape—also learn to attend to just the right property—in this case, shape—for learning more object names.

[1]  Willard Van Orman Quine,et al.  Word and Object , 1960 .

[2]  E. Rosch ON THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF PERCEPTUAL AND SEMANTIC CATEGORIES1 , 1973 .

[3]  F. Moore Cognitive development and the acquisition of language , 1973 .

[4]  I. Biederman Recognition-by-components: a theory of human image understanding. , 1987, Psychological review.

[5]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  The importance of shape in early lexical learning , 1988 .

[6]  Ellen M. Markman,et al.  Categorization and Naming in Children: Problems of Induction , 1989 .

[7]  Philip S. Dale,et al.  Macarthur Communicative Development Inventories , 1992 .

[8]  Robert L. Goldstone Influences of categorization on perceptual discrimination. , 1994, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[9]  Charles A. Nelson,et al.  Basic and applied perspectives on learning, cognition, and development , 1995 .

[10]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  Selective attention and the formation of linear decision boundaries. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Human perception and performance.

[11]  Michael Gasser,et al.  Learning to Talk About the Properties of Objects: A Network Model of the Development of Dimensions , 1997 .

[12]  W. Bruce Croft,et al.  Why is a pomegranate an apple? The role of shape, taxonomic relatedness, and prior lexical knowledge in children's overextensions of apple and dog , 1996, Journal of Child Language.

[13]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  Two competing attentional mechanisms in category learning. , 1998 .

[14]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Early noun vocabularies: do ontology, category structure and syntax correspond? , 1999, Cognition.

[15]  Larissa K. Samuelson,et al.  Children's attention to rigid and deformable shape in naming and non-naming tasks. , 2000, Child development.

[16]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  How children know the relevant properties for generalizing object names , 2002 .

[17]  Michael T. Tolston,et al.  Journal of Experimental Psychology : Human Perception and Performance Movement Constraints on Interpersonal Coordination and Communication , 2014 .