Limits...
Timing matters: the impact of label synchrony on infant categorisation.

Althaus N, Plunkett K - Cognition (2015)

Bottom Line: However, analyses of infants' gaze patterns to object parts reveal that even synchronous labels do not hinder learning completely.We conclude that synchronous labels interfere with the familiarisation process, but this process involves shifts in familiarity vs. novelty preference rather than overshadowing of visual learning.Besides offering detailed insight into the effects of labelling on infants' visual attention, these findings offer the potential to reconcile previous contradictory results.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, United Kingdom. Electronic address: nadja.althaus@psy.ox.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Difference scores (proportion out-of-category leaf – proportion within-category leaf) for all conditions. ∗∗∗ Indicates a result significantly above 0 at the .001-level.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4400968&req=5

f0025: Difference scores (proportion out-of-category leaf – proportion within-category leaf) for all conditions. ∗∗∗ Indicates a result significantly above 0 at the .001-level.

Mentions: To this end we calculated a difference score for the looking proportions directed at the two leaves (i.e. proportion of looking directed at the out-of-category leaf minus proportion of looking directed at the within-category leaf, out of looking directed at any part) across the 10-s test trial for each infant (see Fig. 2 for a sample test display). A positive difference score indicates more looking at the out-of-category leaf. Difference scores were normally distributed in all conditions (Shapiro–Wilk, all ps > .38). Fig. 5 shows the difference scores for all three conditions. A one-way ANOVA was far from significant (F(2, 86) = .65, p > .522). In all three conditions, infants’ difference scores were clearly larger than zero (after collapsing the conditions: M = .23, SE = .03). In particular, infants preferred the novel leaf in the Synchronous condition (M = .19, SE = .04; 2-tailed one-sample t-test: t(28) = 5.17, p < .001). In contrast to the global looking measure, the part-based measure shows that infants in the Synchronous condition did not fail to encode the distributional properties of the leaf, as they perceived the novel leaf as unfamiliar.


Timing matters: the impact of label synchrony on infant categorisation.

Althaus N, Plunkett K - Cognition (2015)

Difference scores (proportion out-of-category leaf – proportion within-category leaf) for all conditions. ∗∗∗ Indicates a result significantly above 0 at the .001-level.
© Copyright Policy - CC BY
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4400968&req=5

f0025: Difference scores (proportion out-of-category leaf – proportion within-category leaf) for all conditions. ∗∗∗ Indicates a result significantly above 0 at the .001-level.
Mentions: To this end we calculated a difference score for the looking proportions directed at the two leaves (i.e. proportion of looking directed at the out-of-category leaf minus proportion of looking directed at the within-category leaf, out of looking directed at any part) across the 10-s test trial for each infant (see Fig. 2 for a sample test display). A positive difference score indicates more looking at the out-of-category leaf. Difference scores were normally distributed in all conditions (Shapiro–Wilk, all ps > .38). Fig. 5 shows the difference scores for all three conditions. A one-way ANOVA was far from significant (F(2, 86) = .65, p > .522). In all three conditions, infants’ difference scores were clearly larger than zero (after collapsing the conditions: M = .23, SE = .03). In particular, infants preferred the novel leaf in the Synchronous condition (M = .19, SE = .04; 2-tailed one-sample t-test: t(28) = 5.17, p < .001). In contrast to the global looking measure, the part-based measure shows that infants in the Synchronous condition did not fail to encode the distributional properties of the leaf, as they perceived the novel leaf as unfamiliar.

Bottom Line: However, analyses of infants' gaze patterns to object parts reveal that even synchronous labels do not hinder learning completely.We conclude that synchronous labels interfere with the familiarisation process, but this process involves shifts in familiarity vs. novelty preference rather than overshadowing of visual learning.Besides offering detailed insight into the effects of labelling on infants' visual attention, these findings offer the potential to reconcile previous contradictory results.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, United Kingdom. Electronic address: nadja.althaus@psy.ox.ac.uk.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus