Parallels Between Action‐Object Mapping and Word‐Object Mapping in Young Children

Abstract

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.

Preschoolers fast map and retain artifact functions as efficiently as artifact names, but artifact actions are the most easily learned

“…Some authors regard incidental learning as an essential feature of fast mapping (e.g., Markson & Bloom, 1997) and others do not (e.g., Deák & Toney, 2013). Unlike previous research which has investigated artifact-use (e.g., Casler & Kelemen, 2005;Childers and Tomasello, 2002;Riggs et al, 2015), we assessed incidental learning to provide a stringent test of young children's fast mapping ability. It is likely that this reflects children's real-world exposure to artifacts in many situations: they are 'incidentally present' when the artifact is used.…”

“…and Markson and Bloom's (1997) demonstration of the long-term retention of fast-mapped object names and facts, there has been renewed interest in what kinds of information are learnt from limited exposure (e.g., Casler, 2014;Deák & Toney, 2013;Holland, Simpson & Riggs, 2015;Horst & Samuelson, 2008;Riggs, Mather, Hyde & Simpson 2015;Vlach & Sandhofer, 2012). Fast mapping describes the learning that takes place from brief exposure (one or a few exposures) to novel information about an object.…”

“…For example, in the study by Riggs et al (2015) children were asked, "Which one do we do this with?" while the experimenter performed the action.…”

“…They could then assume that the experimenter must be referring to the target artifact, because this artifact was associated with an arm. In this way, it was possible for children to pass the Riggs et al (2015) 'action' comprehension test by remembering the action or the function or the substrate associated with the target artifact.…”

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

“…If the same behavior is evident when learning about different types of mappings, the parsimonious conclusion is that common processing mechanisms are in operation. Previous research has provided evidence that there are parallels between word learning and the mapping of actions to objects ( Childers and Tomasello, 2002 , 2003 ; Riggs et al, 2015 ; Dysart et al, 2016 ). In this paper, we focus on investigating whether there are similarities in the mapping of names and facts to objects.…”