The role of systematicity in early referent selection.

Previous studies showed that word learning is affected by children's existing knowledge. For instance, knowledge of semantic category aids word learning, whereas a dense phonological neighbourhood impedes learning of similar-sounding words. Here, we examined to what extent children associate similar-sounding words (e.g., rat and cat) with objects of the same semantic category (e.g., both are animals), that is, to what extent children assume meaning overlap given form overlap between two words. We tested this by first presenting children (N = 93, Mage = 22.4 months) with novel word-object associations. Then, we examined the extent to which children assume that a similar sounding novel label, that is, a phonological neighbour, refers to a similar looking object, that is, a likely semantic neighbour, as opposed to a dissimilar looking object. Were children to preferentially fixate the similar-looking novel object, it would suggest that systematic word form-meaning relations aid referent selection in young children. While we did not find any evidence for such word form-meaning systematicity, we demonstrated that children showed robust learning for the trained novel word-object associations, and were able to discriminate between similar-sounding labels and also similar-looking objects. Thus, we argue that unlike iconicity which appears early in vocabulary development, we find no evidence for systematicity in early referent selection.

Reprint of "Young children's referent selection is guided by novelty for both words and actions".

Young children are biased to select novel, name-unknown objects as referents of novel labels and to similarly favor novel, action-unknown objects as referents of novel actions. What process underlies these common behaviors? In the case of word learning, children may be driven by a novelty bias favoring novel objects as referents. Our study investigated this bias further by investigating whether novelty also affects children's selection of novel objects when a new action is given. In a pre-exposure session, 40 3- and 4-year-olds were shown eight novel objects for 1min. In subsequent referent selection trials, children were shown two pre-exposed objects and one super-novel object and either heard a novel name or saw a novel action. The super-novel object was selected significantly more than the pre-exposed objects on both word and action trials. Our data add to the growing literature suggesting that an endogenous attentional bias to novelty plays a role in children's referent selection and demonstrates further parallels between word and action learning.

Young children's referent selection is guided by novelty for both words and actions.

Young children are biased to select novel, name-unknown objects as referents of novel labels and to similarly favor novel, action-unknown objects as referents of novel actions. What process underlies these common behaviors? In the case of word learning, children may be driven by a novelty bias favoring novel objects as referents. Our study investigated this bias further by investigating whether novelty also affects children's selection of novel objects when a new action is given. In a pre-exposure session, 40 3- and 4-year-olds were shown eight novel objects for 1 min. In subsequent referent selection trials, children were shown two pre-exposed objects and one super-novel object and either heard a novel name or saw a novel action. The super-novel object was selected significantly more than the pre-exposed objects on both word and action trials. Our data add to the growing literature suggesting that an endogenous attentional bias to novelty plays a role in children's referent selection and demonstrates further parallels between word and action learning.

The impact of novel labels on visual processing during infancy.

The impact of novel labels on visual processing was investigated across two experiments with infants aged between 9 and 21 months. Infants viewed pairs of images across a series of preferential looking trials. On each trial, one image was novel, and the other image had previously been viewed by the infant. Some infants viewed images in silence; other infants viewed images accompanied by novel labels. The pattern of fixations both across and within trials revealed that infants in the labelling condition took longer to develop a novelty preference than infants in the silent condition. Our findings contrast with prior research by Robinson and Sloutsky (e.g., Robinson & Sloutsky, 2007a; Sloutsky & Robinson, 2008) who found that novel labels did not disrupt visual processing for infants aged over a year. Provided that overall task demands are sufficiently high, it appears that labels can disrupt visual processing for infants during the developmental period of establishing a lexicon. The results suggest that when infants are processing labels and objects, attentional resources are shared across modalities.

Mutual exclusivity and phonological novelty constrain word learning at 16 months.

Studies report that infants as young as 1 ; 3 to 1 ; 5 will seek out a novel object in response to hearing a novel label (e.g. Halberda, 2003; Markman, Wasow & Hansen, 2003). This behaviour is commonly known as the 'mutual exclusivity' response (Markman, 1989; 1990). However, evidence for mutual exclusivity does not imply that the infant has associated a novel label with a novel object. We used an intermodal preferential looking task to investigate whether infants aged 1 ; 4 could use mutual exclusivity to guide their association of novel labels with novel objects. The results show that infants can successfully map a novel label onto a novel object, provided that the novel label has no familiar phonological neighbours. Therefore, as early as 1 ; 4, infants can use mutual exclusivity to form novel word-object associations, although this process is constrained by the phonological novelty of a label.

Novel labels support 10-month-olds' attention to novel objects.

What is the source of the mutual exclusivity bias whereby infants map novel labels onto novel objects? In an intermodal preferential looking task, we found that novel labels support 10-month-olds' attention to a novel object over a familiar object. In contrast, familiar labels and a neutral phrase gradually reduced attention to a novel object. Markman (1989, 1990) argued that infants must recall the name of a familiar object to exclude it as the referent of a novel label. We argue that 10-month-olds' attention is guided by the novelty of objects and labels rather than knowledge of the names for familiar objects. Mutual exclusivity, as a language-specific bias, might emerge from a more general constraint on attention and learning.

Learning Words Over Time: The Role of Stimulus Repetition in Mutual Exclusivity.

During the second year of life, infants develop a preference to attach novel labels to novel objects. This behavior is commonly known as "mutual exclusivity" (Markman, 1989). In an intermodal preferential looking experiment with 19.5- and 22.5-month-olds, stimulus repetition was critical for observing mutual exclusivity. On the first occasion that a novel label was presented with 1 familiar object and 1 novel object, looking behavior was unsystematic. However, on reexposure to the same stimuli, 22.5-month-olds looked preferentially at the novel object prior to the re-presentation of the novel label. These findings suggest a powerful memory mechanism for novel labels and objects, enabling mutual exclusivity to emerge across repeated exposures to potential referents.

Why would a special FM process exist in adults, when it does not appear to exist in children?

Cooper Greve, and Henson (this issue)  caution restraint before accepting that a fast mapping (FM) process exists in adults. We welcome this, but would also add that the original rationale for studying FM in adults is not currently supported by developmental research. Despite the claims of several adult FM researchers, there is little evidence from developmental word learning research for a special hippocampus-independent FM process critical for children's word learning.

Parallels Between Action-Object Mapping and Word-Object Mapping in Young Children.

Across a series of four experiments with 3- to 4-year-olds we demonstrate how cognitive mechanisms supporting noun learning extend to the mapping of actions to objects. In Experiment 1 (n = 61) the demonstration of a novel action led children to select a novel, rather than a familiar object. In Experiment 2 (n = 78) children exhibited long-term retention of novel action-object mappings and extended these actions to other category members. In Experiment 3 (n = 60) we showed that children formed an accurate sensorimotor record of the novel action. In Experiment 4 (n = 54) we demonstrate limits on the types of actions mapped to novel objects. Overall these data suggest that certain aspects of noun mapping share common processing with action mapping and support a domain-general account of word learning.

Get Your Facts Right: Preschoolers Systematically Extend Both Object Names and Category-Relevant Facts.

There is an ongoing debate over the extent to which language development shares common processing mechanisms with other domains of learning. It is well-established that toddlers will systematically extend object labels to similarly shaped category exemplars (e.g., Markman and Hutchinson, 1984; Landau et al., 1988). However, previous research is inconclusive as to whether young children will similarly extend factual information about an object to other category members. We explicitly contrast facts varying in category relevance, and test for extension using two different tasks. Three- to four-year-olds (N = 61) were provided with one of three types of information about a single novel object: a category-relevant fact ('it's from a place called Modi'), a category-irrelevant fact ('my uncle gave it to me'), or an object label ('it's called a Modi'). At test, children provided with the object name or category-relevant fact were significantly more likely to display systematic category extension than children who learnt the category-irrelevant fact. Our findings contribute to a growing body of evidence that the mechanisms responsible for word learning may be domain-general in nature.

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.

Same items, different order: effects of temporal variability on infant categorization.

How does variability between members of a category influence infants' category learning? We explore the impact of the order in which different items are sampled on category formation. Two groups of 10-months-olds were presented with a series of exemplars to be organized into a single category. In a low distance group, the order of presentation minimized the perceptual distance between consecutive exemplars. In a high distance group, the order of presentation maximized the distance between successive exemplars. At test, only infants in the High Distance condition reliably discriminated between the category prototype and an atypical exemplar. Hence, the order in which infants learnt about the exemplars impacted their categorization performance. Our findings demonstrate the importance of moment-to-moment variations in similarity during infants' category learning.

Discrepancy between parental reports of infants' receptive vocabulary and infants' behaviour in a preferential looking task.

Two experiments are described which explore the relationship between parental reports of infants' receptive vocabularies at 1 ; 6 (Experiment 1a) or 1;3, 1;6 and 1;9 (Experiment 1b) and the comprehension infants demonstrated in a preferential looking task. The instrument used was the Oxford CDI, a British English adaptation of the MacArthur-Bates CDI (Words & Gestures). Infants were shown pairs of images of familiar objects, either both name-known or both name-unknown according to their parent's responses on the CDI. At all ages, and on both name-known and name-unknown trials, preference for the target image increased significantly from baseline when infants heard the target's label. This discrepancy suggests that parental report underestimates infants' word knowledge.