Limits...
Four-Year-Olds Use a Mixture of Spatial Reference Frames.

Negen J, Nardini M - PLoS ONE (2015)

Bottom Line: Three-year-olds made systematic errors by using the wrong frame of reference, 4-year-olds were at chance, and only 5- and 6-year-olds were successful.Can we better understand the developmental change that takes place at four years?Further application of the selected model also suggests that children become both more reliant on the correct frame and more accurate with any chosen frame as they mature.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, County Durham, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT
Keeping track of unseen objects is an important spatial skill. In order to do this, people must situate the object in terms of different frames of reference, including body position (egocentric frame of reference), landmarks in the surrounding environment (extrinsic frame reference), or other attached features (intrinsic frame of reference). Nardini et al. hid a toy in one of 12 cups in front of children, turned the array when they were not looking, and then asked them to point to the cup with the toy. This forced children to use the intrinsic frame (information about the array of cups) to locate the hidden toy. Three-year-olds made systematic errors by using the wrong frame of reference, 4-year-olds were at chance, and only 5- and 6-year-olds were successful. Can we better understand the developmental change that takes place at four years? This paper uses a modelling approach to re-examine the data and distinguish three possible strategies that could lead to the previous results at four years: (1) Children were choosing cups randomly, (2) Children were pointing between the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location and the correct target, and (3) Children were pointing near the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location on some trials and near the target on the rest. Results heavily favor the last possibility: 4-year-olds were not just guessing or trying to combine the available frames of reference. They were using the intrinsic frame on some trials, but not doing so consistently. These insights suggest that accounts of improving spatial performance at 4 years need to explain why there is a mixture of responses. Further application of the selected model also suggests that children become both more reliant on the correct frame and more accurate with any chosen frame as they mature.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus

Parameter estimates from the Cue Mixing model at each age.This model has a separate parameter for the frame of reference being chosen (x axis) and the concentration of responses around the place indicated by that frame (y axis). Both are seen to improve with age here.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4489865&req=5

pone.0131984.g004: Parameter estimates from the Cue Mixing model at each age.This model has a separate parameter for the frame of reference being chosen (x axis) and the concentration of responses around the place indicated by that frame (y axis). Both are seen to improve with age here.

Mentions: Fig 4 shows the posterior distributions of w and λ. Leftwards indicates heavier use of the egocentric/extrinsic frame. Rightwards indicates heavier use of the intrinsic frame. Downwards indicates more spread in the responses around the two centers. Upwards indicates higher concentration of responses. The posterior estimates move both rightwards and upwards as age increases. This is interesting since it suggests that the developmental process at play is not just becoming more reliant on the intrinsic frame, nor is it just becoming more precise in terms of spatial memory using a given chosen frame. There appear to be separate contributions of both.


Four-Year-Olds Use a Mixture of Spatial Reference Frames.

Negen J, Nardini M - PLoS ONE (2015)

Parameter estimates from the Cue Mixing model at each age.This model has a separate parameter for the frame of reference being chosen (x axis) and the concentration of responses around the place indicated by that frame (y axis). Both are seen to improve with age here.
© Copyright Policy
Related In: Results  -  Collection

License
Show All Figures
getmorefigures.php?uid=PMC4489865&req=5

pone.0131984.g004: Parameter estimates from the Cue Mixing model at each age.This model has a separate parameter for the frame of reference being chosen (x axis) and the concentration of responses around the place indicated by that frame (y axis). Both are seen to improve with age here.
Mentions: Fig 4 shows the posterior distributions of w and λ. Leftwards indicates heavier use of the egocentric/extrinsic frame. Rightwards indicates heavier use of the intrinsic frame. Downwards indicates more spread in the responses around the two centers. Upwards indicates higher concentration of responses. The posterior estimates move both rightwards and upwards as age increases. This is interesting since it suggests that the developmental process at play is not just becoming more reliant on the intrinsic frame, nor is it just becoming more precise in terms of spatial memory using a given chosen frame. There appear to be separate contributions of both.

Bottom Line: Three-year-olds made systematic errors by using the wrong frame of reference, 4-year-olds were at chance, and only 5- and 6-year-olds were successful.Can we better understand the developmental change that takes place at four years?Further application of the selected model also suggests that children become both more reliant on the correct frame and more accurate with any chosen frame as they mature.

View Article: PubMed Central - PubMed

Affiliation: Department of Psychology, Durham University, Durham, County Durham, United Kingdom.

ABSTRACT
Keeping track of unseen objects is an important spatial skill. In order to do this, people must situate the object in terms of different frames of reference, including body position (egocentric frame of reference), landmarks in the surrounding environment (extrinsic frame reference), or other attached features (intrinsic frame of reference). Nardini et al. hid a toy in one of 12 cups in front of children, turned the array when they were not looking, and then asked them to point to the cup with the toy. This forced children to use the intrinsic frame (information about the array of cups) to locate the hidden toy. Three-year-olds made systematic errors by using the wrong frame of reference, 4-year-olds were at chance, and only 5- and 6-year-olds were successful. Can we better understand the developmental change that takes place at four years? This paper uses a modelling approach to re-examine the data and distinguish three possible strategies that could lead to the previous results at four years: (1) Children were choosing cups randomly, (2) Children were pointing between the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location and the correct target, and (3) Children were pointing near the egocentric/extrinsic-cued location on some trials and near the target on the rest. Results heavily favor the last possibility: 4-year-olds were not just guessing or trying to combine the available frames of reference. They were using the intrinsic frame on some trials, but not doing so consistently. These insights suggest that accounts of improving spatial performance at 4 years need to explain why there is a mixture of responses. Further application of the selected model also suggests that children become both more reliant on the correct frame and more accurate with any chosen frame as they mature.

No MeSH data available.


Related in: MedlinePlus