More gestures than answers: Children learning about balance.

Pine, Karen J.; Lufkin, Nicola; Messer, David

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.40.6.1059

Cited by 148 publications

(119 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

112

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Even blind individuals who have never seen gesture move their hands as they talk (Iverson & Goldin-Meadow, 1998). Moreover, the gestures learners produce when explaining a task predict whether they will soon master that task (Church & Goldin-Meadow, 1986;Perry, Church, & Goldin-Meadow, 1988;Pine, Lufkin, & Messer, 2004), and learners who gesture spontaneously on a task are more likely to retain what they have learned about the task than learners who do not gesture (Alibali & Goldin-Meadow, 1993;Cook & Goldin-Meadow, 2006). These findings suggest that gesturing can promote learning.…”

mentioning

confidence: 56%

Gesturing makes learning last

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 56%

Gesturing makes learning last

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, gesture may be used to explore when novel conceptualizations are useful (Kita, 2000)-and gestures that manifest this exploration are most frequent when conceptual exploration is useful. In support of this claim, several studies have shown that children produce gesture-speech mismatches most frequently when they are at the cusp of understanding a task (Church & Goldin-Meadow, 1986;Perry et al, 1988;Pine et al, 2004).…”

Section: Relationship Among the Four Functionsmentioning

confidence: 96%

How do gestures influence thinking and speaking? The gesture-for-conceptualization hypothesis.

Kita

Alibali

Chu

2017

Psychological Review

248

264

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Permanent WRAP URL:http://wrap.warwick.ac.uk/84187 Copyright and reuse:The Warwick Research Archive Portal (WRAP) makes this work by researchers of the University of Warwick available open access under the following conditions. Copyright © and all moral rights to the version of the paper presented here belong to the individual author(s) and/or other copyright owners. To the extent reasonable and practicable the material made available in WRAP has been checked for eligibility before being made available.Copies of full items can be used for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge. Provided that the authors, title and full bibliographic details are credited, a hyperlink and/or URL is given for the original metadata page and the content is not changed in any way.Publisher's statement: © 2017, American Psychological Association. This paper is not the copy of record and may not exactly replicate the final, authoritative version of the article. Please do not copy or cite without authors permission. The final article will be available, upon publication, via its DOI: 10.1037/rev0000059 A note on versions:The version presented here may differ from the published version or, version of record, if you wish to cite this item you are advised to consult the publisher's version. Please see the 'permanent WRAP URL' above for details on accessing the published version and note that access may require a subscription. AbstractPeople spontaneously produce gestures during speaking and thinking. We focus here on gestures that depict or indicate information related to the contents of concurrent speech or thought (i.e., representational gestures). Previous research indicates that such gestures have not only communicative functions, but also self-oriented cognitive functions. In this paper, we propose a new theoretical framework, the Gesture-forConceptualization Hypothesis, which explains the self-oriented functions of representational gestures. According to this framework, representational gestures affect cognitive processes in four main ways: gestures activate, manipulate, package and explore spatio-motoric representations for speaking and thinking. These four functions are shaped by gesture's ability to schematize information, that is, to focus on a small subset of available information that is potentially relevant to the task at hand. The framework is based on the assumption that gestures are generated from the same system that generates practical actions, such as object manipulation; however, gestures are distinct from practical actions in that they represent information. The framework provides a novel, parsimonious and comprehensive account of the self-oriented functions of gestures. We discuss how the framework accounts for gestures that depict abstract or metaphoric content, and we consider implications for the relations between self-oriented and communicative functions of gestures.

show abstract

“…Variability also features in the microgenetic approach. This focus on variability is shown, among others, in the work of Siegler (1994Siegler ( , 1996Siegler ( , 1997, Goldin-Meadow, Alibali, and Church (1993), Alibali (1999), Granott (1993), Granott (1995), Fischer, Bullock, Rotenberg, andRaya (1993), Fischer and Yan (2002), Lautrey, Bonthoux, and Pacteau (1996), Lautrey (1993), Lautrey and Cibois (1994), Tunteler and Resing, (2002), Granott (1998Granott ( , 2002, Pine, Lufkin, and Messer (2004) and Flynn, O'Malley, and Wood (2004).…”

Section: Variabilitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Wobbles, humps and sudden jumps: a case study of continuity, discontinuity and variability in early language development

Dijk

Geert

2007

Infant and Child Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Current individual-based, process-oriented approaches (dynamic systems theory and the microgenetic perspective) have led to an increase of variability-centred studies in the literature. The aim of this article is to propose a technique that incorporates variability in the analysis of the shape of developmental change. This approach is illustrated by the analysis of time serial language data, in particular data on the development of preposition use, collected from four participants. Visual inspection suggests that the development of prepositions-in-contexts shows a characteristic pattern of two phases, corresponding with a discontinuity. Three criteria for testing such discontinuous phase-wise change in individual data are presented and applied to the data. These are: (1) the sub-pattern criterion, (2) the peak criterion and (3) the membership criterion. The analyses rely on bootstrap and resampling procedures based on various null hypotheses. The results show that there are some indications of discontinuity in all participants, although clear inter-individual differences have been found, depending on the criteria used. In the discussion we will address several fundamental issues concerning (dis)continuity and variability in individual-based, process-oriented data sets. Copyright # 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.Key words: intra-individual variability; early language development; continuity; discontinuity; random sampling techniques; dynamic systems theory; microgenetic One of the major achievements of individual-based, process-oriented approaches (dynamic systems theory and the microgenetic perspective) is the increase in the number of variability-centred studies that have appeared in the literature. The implication is that a growing number of researchers acknowledge the meaningfulness of intra-individual variability and show an interest in irregular aspects of

show abstract

More gestures than answers: Children learning about balance.

Cited by 148 publications

References 34 publications

Gesturing makes learning last

Gesturing makes learning last

How do gestures influence thinking and speaking? The gesture-for-conceptualization hypothesis.

Wobbles, humps and sudden jumps: a case study of continuity, discontinuity and variability in early language development

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About