Changes in Visual Object Recognition Precede the Shape Bias in Early Noun Learning

Two of the most formidable skills that characterize human beings are language and our prowess in visual object recognition. They may also be developmentally intertwined. Two experiments, a large sample cross-sectional study and a smaller sample 6-month longitudinal study of 18- to 24-month-olds, tested a hypothesized developmental link between changes in visual object representation and noun learning. Previous findings in visual object recognition indicate that children’s ability to recognize common basic level categories from sparse structural shape representations of object shape emerges between the ages of 18 and 24 months, is related to noun vocabulary size, and is lacking in children with language delay. Other research shows in artificial noun learning tasks that during this same developmental period, young children systematically generalize object names by shape, that this shape bias predicts future noun learning, and is lacking in children with language delay. The two experiments examine the developmental relation between visual object recognition and the shape bias for the first time. The results show that developmental changes in visual object recognition systematically precede the emergence of the shape bias. The results suggest a developmental pathway in which early changes in visual object recognition that are themselves linked to category learning enable the discovery of higher-order regularities in category structure and thus the shape bias in novel noun learning tasks. The proposed developmental pathway has implications for understanding the role of specific experience in the development of both visual object recognition and the shape bias in early noun learning.

[1]  J. Davidoff,et al.  Developmental trajectories of part-based and configural object recognition in adolescence. , 2013, Developmental psychology.

[2]  Larissa K. Samuelson,et al.  The Shape of the Vocabulary Predicts the Shape of the Bias , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[3]  Lennart Schalk,et al.  Preschoolers’ Novel Noun Extensions: Shape in Spite of Knowing Better , 2011, Front. Psychology.

[4]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Parts and Relations in Young Children's Shape-Based Object Recognition , 2011, Journal of cognition and development : official journal of the Cognitive Development Society.

[5]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Symbolic play connects to language through visual object recognition. , 2011, Developmental science.

[6]  Erin R Hahn,et al.  The shape-bias in Spanish-speaking children and its relationship to vocabulary* , 2011, Journal of Child Language.

[7]  Kim Plunkett,et al.  A statistical estimate of infant and toddler vocabulary size from CDI analysis. , 2011, Developmental science.

[8]  C. Connor,et al.  Neural representations for object perception: structure, category, and adaptive coding. , 2011, Annual review of neuroscience.

[9]  Thomas T. Hills,et al.  Small Worlds and Semantic Network Growth in Typical and Late Talkers , 2011, PloS one.

[10]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Packing: A geometric analysis of feature selection and category formation , 2011, Cognitive Systems Research.

[11]  Volker H. Franz,et al.  Effects of object shape on the visual guidance of action , 2010, Vision Research.

[12]  Terry L. Jernigan,et al.  The Basics of Brain Development , 2010, Neuropsychology Review.

[13]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Early biases and developmental changes in self-generated object views. , 2010, Journal of vision.

[14]  Eliana Colunga,et al.  Knowledge as Process: Contextually Cued Attention and Early Word Learning , 2010, Cogn. Sci..

[15]  Leonidas A. A. Doumas,et al.  A Computational Account of the Development of the Generalization of Shape Information , 2010, Cogn. Sci..

[16]  Scott P. Johnson,et al.  3D object completion develops through infants' manual exploration , 2010 .

[17]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Development through Sensorimotor Coordination , 2010 .

[18]  Linda B. Smith.  From Fragments to Geometric Shape , 2009, Current directions in psychological science.

[19]  R. Farivar.  Dorsal–ventral integration in object recognition , 2009, Brain Research Reviews.

[20]  Marlene Behrmann,et al.  Development of object recognition in humans , 2009, F1000 biology reports.

[21]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Developmental changes in visual object recognition between 18 and 24 months of age. , 2009, Developmental science.

[22]  Fei Xu,et al.  Induction, overhypotheses, and the shape bias: Some arguments and evidence for rational constructivism , 2009 .

[23]  K. Plunkett,et al.  What is ‘word understanding’ for the parent of a one-year-old? Matching the difficulty of a lexical comprehension task to parental CDI report* , 2008, Journal of Child Language.

[24]  Robert L. Goldstone,et al.  ' s personal copy Simplicity and generalization : Short-cutting abstraction in children ’ s object categorizations , 1997 .

[25]  Letitia R. Naigles,et al.  Do children with autism spectrum disorders show a shape bias in word learning? , 2008, Autism research : official journal of the International Society for Autism Research.

[26]  S. Waxman,et al.  Taking stock as theories of word learning take shape. , 2008, Developmental science.

[27]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  The Self-organization of Skilled Noun Learning the Attentional Learning Account , 2022 .

[28]  Joan Stiles,et al.  The Fundamentals of Brain Development: Integrating Nature and Nurture , 2008 .

[29]  M. Tarr,et al.  Visual object recognition: do we know more now than we did 20 years ago? , 2007, Annual review of psychology.

[30]  J. Tenenbaum,et al.  Bayesian Special Section Learning Overhypotheses with Hierarchical Bayesian Models , 2022 .

[31]  M. Riesenhuber,et al.  Categorization Training Results in Shape- and Category-Selective Human Neural Plasticity , 2007, Neuron.

[32]  Markus Graf,et al.  Coordinate transformations in object recognition. , 2006, Psychological bulletin.

[33]  C. Mash,et al.  Multidimensional shape similarity in the development of visual object classification. , 2006, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[34]  S. Thorpe,et al.  Rapid categorization of foveal and extrafoveal natural images: Associated ERPs and effects of lateralization , 2005, Brain and Cognition.

[35]  Mark S. Blumberg,et al.  Basic Instinct: The Genesis of Behavior , 2005 .

[36]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  From the lexicon to expectations about kinds: a role for associative learning. , 2005, Psychological review.

[37]  Linda B Smith,et al.  Object name learning and object perception: a deficit in late talkers , 2005, Journal of Child Language.

[38]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Linguistic Cues Enhance the Learning of Perceptual Cues , 2005, Psychological science.

[39]  Asaid Khateb,et al.  Visual recognition of faces, objects, and words using degraded stimuli: Where and when it occurs , 2004, Human brain mapping.

[40]  M. Rowe,et al.  Measuring productive vocabulary of toddlers in low-income families: concurrent and predictive validity of three sources of data , 2004, Journal of Child Language.

[41]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Shape and the first hundred nouns. , 2004, Child development.

[42]  Cari S. Kilbreath,et al.  Thirteen-month-olds rely on shared labels and shape similarity for inductive inferences. , 2004, Child development.

[43]  Terry Caelli,et al.  Development of configural 3D object recognition , 2004, Behavioural Brain Research.

[44]  Susan S. Jones,et al.  Late talkers show no shape bias in a novel name extension task , 2003 .

[45]  W. Hayward.  After the viewpoint debate: where next in object recognition? , 2003, Trends in Cognitive Sciences.

[46]  Linda B Smith,et al.  Known and novel noun extensions: attention at two levels of abstraction. , 2003, Child development.

[47]  P. Bloom,et al.  How specific is the shape bias? , 2003, Child development.

[48]  M. Behrmann,et al.  Impact of learning on representation of parts and wholes in monkey inferotemporal cortex , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[49]  Michel Vidal-Naquet,et al.  Visual features of intermediate complexity and their use in classification , 2002, Nature Neuroscience.

[50]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Object name Learning Provides On-the-Job Training for Attention , 2002, Psychological science.

[51]  Larissa K. Samuelson,et al.  Statistical regularities in vocabulary guide language acquisition in connectionist models and 15-20-month-olds. , 2002, Developmental psychology.

[52]  M. Tarr,et al.  Visual Object Recognition , 1996, ISTCS.

[53]  A Yonas,et al.  What's in a shape? Children represent shape variability differently than adults when naming objects. , 2001, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[54]  Narendra Ahuja,et al.  Learning to recognize objects , 2000, Proceedings IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition. CVPR 2000 (Cat. No.PR00662).

[55]  John E. Hummel,et al.  Where View-based Theories Break Down: The Role of Structure in Shape Perception and Object Recognition , 2000 .

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

[57]  D. Poulin-Dubois,et al.  Infants' reliance on shape to generalize novel labels to animate and inanimate objects , 1999, Journal of Child Language.

[58]  D. Poulin-Dubois,et al.  The role of shape similarity in toddlers' lexical extensions , 1999 .

[59]  Mutsumi Imai,et al.  Children's Theories of Word Meaning: The Role of Shape Similarity in Early Acquisition , 1994 .

[60]  I Biederman,et al.  Metric invariance in object recognition: a review and further evidence. , 1992, Canadian journal of psychology.

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

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

[63]  Michael Brady,et al.  Representing shape , 1984, ICRA.