Interaction between language and vision: It’s momentary, abstract, and it develops

Abstract

In this paper, we present a case study that explores the nature and development of the mechanisms by which language interacts with and influences our ability to represent and retain information from one of our most important non-linguistic systems-- vision. In previous work (Dessalegn & Landau, 2008), we showed that 4 year-olds remembered conjunctions of visual features better when the visual target was accompanied by a sentence containing an asymmetric spatial predicate (e.g., the yellow is to the left of the black) but not when the visual target was accompanied by a sentence containing a novel noun (e.g., look at the dax) or a symmetric spatial predicate (e.g., the yellow is touching the black). In this paper, we extend these findings. In three experiments, 3, 4 and 6 year-olds were shown square blocks split in half by color vertically, horizontally or diagonally (e.g., yellow-left, black-right) and were asked to perform a delayed-matching task. We found that sentences containing spatial asymmetric predicates (e.g., the yellow is to the left of the black) and non-spatial asymmetric predicates (e.g., the yellow is prettier than the black) helped 4 year-olds, although not to the same extent. By contrast, 3 year-olds did not benefit from different linguistic instructions at all while 6 year-olds performed at ceiling in the task with or without the relevant sentences. Our findings suggest by age 4, the effects of language on non-linguistic tasks depend on highly abstract representations of the linguistic instructions and are momentary, seen only in the context of the task. We further speculate that language becomes more automatically engaged in nonlinguistic tasks over development.

Language supports young children’s use of spatial relations to remember locations

“…Nardini et al (2006) showed a transition in intrinsic reference frame selection between 4 and 5 years of age, but their “surprise trial” results suggested that verbal encoding was not driving this developmental change. These findings contrasted with research suggesting that children’s language abilities account for development changes on a range of spatial tasks (Dessalegn & Landau, 2008, 2013; Hermer-Vazquez et al, 2001; Loewenstein & Gentner, 2005; Pruden et al, 2011; Shusterman et al, 2011; Simms & Gentner, 2008). One possible explanation for this variation across tasks could be that language supports various types of spatial skills differently over development.…”

“…One possible explanation for this variation across tasks could be that language supports various types of spatial skills differently over development. For instance, spatial recall may rely less on language than object recognition (Dessalegn & Landau, 2008, 2013) or reorientation (Hermer-Vazquez et al, 2001). Alternatively, it could be the case that effects of language were not apparent in Nardini et al’s task because their paradigm was not designed to test language specifically.…”

“…Recently, there has been increased interest in understanding relations between language and spatial cognition over development. Research indicates that providing task-relevant verbal cues while children perform spatial tasks can bolster children’s performance (Dessalegn & Landau, 2008, 2013; Loewenstein & Gentner, 2005; Shusterman, Lee, & Spelke, 2011) and that children’s spatial language production abilities predict their spatial skills (Hermer-Vazquez, Moffet, & Munkholm, 2001; Pruden, Levine, & Huttenlocher, 2011). However, the specific way in which language relates to spatial cognition is not universally agreed upon (e.g., Nardini et al, 2006; Ratliff & Newcombe, 2008), and this relation has previously only been tested in a limited range of spatial tasks.…”

“…Providing spatial language in the context of spatial tasks can promote preschool-aged children’s spatial performance (e.g., Dessalegn & Landau, 2008, 2013; Loewenstein & Gentner, 2005; Shusterman et al, 2011). Loewenstein and Gentner (2005) showed that providing children with spatial terms such as ‘top’ and ‘middle’ during or just prior to a relational mapping task increased children’s performance.…”

“…We tested 4-year-olds because this age was just prior to the reliable use of the intrinsic reference frame in Nardini et al’s study and because multiple studies have shown relations between spatial skills and language at 4 years of age (Dessalegn & Landau, 2008, 2013; Loewenstein & Gentner, 2005; Pruden et al, 2011; Shusterman et al, 2011). Experiment 1 tested whether verbal encoding of spatial relations among objects contributed to children’s selection of an intrinsic reference frame during recall.…”