Children’s use of comparison and function in novel object categorization

Kimura, Katherine; Hunley, Samuel B.; Namy, Laura L.

doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2017.12.016

Cited by 10 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the virus world, some of these constraints become muddled-up and comparison of sequences (linear strings of a combination of either four (nucleotides) or twenty (amino acids) letters) becomes of limited usefulness for unravelling primitive precursors. On the other hand, the process of comparing three-dimensional (3D) objects is an activity that humans show at very young age, from about 3 years old, and which helps children (us, once upon a time) in establishing new object categories, an invaluable learning process of the outside world [ 3 ]. This same activity but comparing the structures of two or more proteins allows us to identify the salience of conserved 3D features even when the similarity in their primary sequences has become undetectable over the course of time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Superimposition of Viral Protein Structures: A Means to Decipher the Phylogenies of Viruses

Ravantti

Martínez-Castillo

Abrescia

2020

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Superimposition of protein structures is key in unravelling structural homology across proteins whose sequence similarity is lost. Structural comparison provides insights into protein function and evolution. Here, we review some of the original findings and thoughts that have led to the current established structure-based phylogeny of viruses: starting from the original observation that the major capsid proteins of plant and animal viruses possess similar folds, to the idea that each virus has an innate “self”. This latter idea fueled the conceptualization of the PRD1-adenovirus lineage whose members possess a major capsid protein (innate “self”) with a double jelly roll fold. Based on this approach, long-range viral evolutionary relationships can be detected allowing the virosphere to be classified in four structure-based lineages. However, this process is not without its challenges or limitations. As an example of these hurdles, we finally touch on the difficulty of establishing structural “self” traits for enveloped viruses showcasing the coronaviruses but also the power of structure-based analysis in the understanding of emerging viruses

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Superimposition of Viral Protein Structures: A Means to Decipher the Phylogenies of Viruses

Ravantti

Martínez-Castillo

Abrescia

2020

Viruses

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The shape preference tends to manifest more robustly with age, especially between 2 and 6 years of age (Augier & Thibaut, 2013; Horst & Twomey, 2013; Jones et al, 1991; Samuelson & Smith, 1999). Shape preference is not only observed in word‐learning tasks, but it is also broadly observed in various types of categorization tasks (Davidson, Rainey, Vanegas, & Hilvert, 2018; Diesendruck & Bloom, 2003; Graham & Diesendruck, 2010; Graham, Kilbreath, & Welder, 2004; Kimura, Hunley, & Namy, 2018; Landau et al, 1988; Ward, Becker, Hass, & Vela, 1991). For example, in the study by Diesendruck and Bloom (2003), children showed the shape preference when they were asked to select an object of the same category as the target object.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…They were asked to select the testing object that is the same as the target. Based on previous studies (Davidson et al, 2018;Diesendruck & Bloom, 2003;Graham & Diesendruck, 2010;Kimura et al, 2018;Landau et al, 1988), we expected that children would more frequently choose the shape-match items than color-or texture-match items.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, other evidence suggests that shape preference is context‐sensitive and not always consistently found (Cimpian & Markman, 2005; Diesendruck & Bloom, 2003; Jones et al, 1991; Kimura et al, 2018; Samuelson & Horst, 2008; Samuelson, Schutte, & Horst, 2009; Samuelson & Smith, 2000). For example, Deák (2000) showed that children's shape preference is object‐ and context‐dependent when interacting with complex artifacts.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In brief, previous studies have suggested that preschool children, especially toddlers, classify objects primarily on the basis of perceptual characteristics, such as shape (Davidson et al, 2018; Diesendruck & Bloom, 2003; Graham & Diesendruck, 2010; Graham et al, 2004; Kimura et al, 2018; Landau et al, 1988; Ward et al, 1991). However, the conclusions of these studies may be invalid because they have ignored another perceptual dimension, namely, pattern, which is the visual cue of knowing the material or structural properties of objects.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Children prefer pattern over shape during complex categorization

Cao

et al. 2020

PsyCh Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous studies have shown that children tend to view objects with similar shapes as having the same category. However, these studies often adopt simple categorization tasks and ignore the perceptual dimension (e.g., surface pattern of objects) that likely attract children's attention. The purpose of this study was to test how children categorize when pattern competes against shape. In Experiment 1a children were presented with a target and several testing objects that shared the same shape, color, or texture as the target. The results indicated that children preferentially selected the shape-sharing objects. However, when the texture was replaced by pattern (Experiment 1b), there was no significant difference between shape and pattern choices. When shared features were intricately overlapped between different pairs of stimuli (Experiment 2), children preferentially chose objects that shared patterns over those that shared shapes. These findings are the first to reveal children's pattern preference in categorization, supporting the view that children's categorization is flexible.

show abstract