How children know the relevant properties for generalizing object names

Young children’s novel word extensions indicate that their animal categories, like those of adults, are characterized by multiple similarities among instances; whereas their artifact categories, again like those of adults, are characterized more simply by commonalities among instances in shape. Three experiments shed light on the nature and development of a mechanism that enables children to organize novel lexical categories differently for different kinds of objects. Experiment 1 shows that, by adult judgments, animals and artifacts present different category organizations. Experiment 2 shows relations between both age and the number of nouns young children have acquired, and children’s kind-specific generalizations of newly learned nouns. Experiment 3 is a training study in which even younger children show an ability to learn and then generalize highly abstract relations between different contextual cues and different category structures; and importantly, to learn more than one set of such relations at a time. Together, these three findings indicate one way in which children are able to rapidly and accurately form lexical categories that parallel those of adults in their language community.

[1]  R. Nosofsky Attention, similarity, and the identification-categorization relationship. , 1986, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[2]  F. Keil Explanation, association, and the acquisition of word meaning , 1994 .

[3]  G. Butterworth,et al.  Infants' use of object parts in early categorization , 1998 .

[4]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Cognition Without Concepts , 1993 .

[5]  Dorrit Billman,et al.  Observational Learning From Internal Feedback: A Simulation of an Adaptive Learning Method , 1988, Cogn. Sci..

[6]  J. F. Macario,et al.  Young children's use of color in classification: Foods and canonically colored objects , 1991 .

[7]  R. French,et al.  A connectionist account of asymmetric category learning in early infancy. , 2000, Developmental psychology.

[8]  John D. Coley,et al.  Perspectives on language and thought: Language and categorization: The acquisition of natural kind terms , 1991 .

[9]  Rochel Gelman,et al.  Structural Constraints on Cognitive Development: Introduction to a Special Issue of Cognitive Science , 1990, Cogn. Sci..

[10]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Committing to an Ontology: A Connectionist Account , 2000 .

[11]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  How children name objects with shoes , 1998 .

[12]  G. Butterworth,et al.  Infants' attention to object structure in early categorization. , 1998, Developmental psychology.

[13]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Shifting ontological boundaries: how Japanese‐ and English‐speaking children generalize names for animals and artifacts , 2003 .

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

[15]  Dorrit Billman,et al.  Systems of correlations in rule and category learning: Use of structured input in learning syntactic categories , 1989 .

[16]  D. Medin,et al.  The role of theories in conceptual coherence. , 1985, Psychological review.

[17]  J. Mandler,et al.  Studies in Inductive Inference in Infancy , 1998, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Object properties and knowledge in early lexical learning. , 1991, Child development.

[19]  Douglas L. Medin,et al.  Context theory of classification learning. , 1978 .

[20]  E. Spelke,et al.  Ontological categories guide young children's inductions of word meaning: Object terms and substance terms , 1991, Cognition.

[21]  Linda B. Smith Learning How to Learn Words , 2000 .

[22]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Perceptual Similarity and Conceptual Structure , 1992 .

[23]  S. Carey Conceptual Change in Childhood , 1985 .

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

[25]  S. Gelman The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[26]  N. Goodman Fact, Fiction, and Forecast , 1955 .

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

[28]  Elizabeth F. Shipley,et al.  Categories, hierarchies, and induction , 1993 .

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

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

[31]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  The place of perception in children's concepts ☆ , 1993 .

[32]  James F. Knutson,et al.  Unsupervised concept learning and value systematicity: a complex whole aids learning the parts. , 1996, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[33]  J. Kruschke,et al.  ALCOVE: an exemplar-based connectionist model of category learning. , 1992, Psychological review.

[34]  D. Medin,et al.  Comments on part I: psychological essentialism , 1989 .

[35]  P. D. Eimas,et al.  Evidence for Representations of Perceptually Similar Natural Categories by 3-Month-Old and 4-Month-Old Infants , 1993, Perception.

[36]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Naming in young children: a dumb attentional mechanism? , 1996, Cognition.