Changes in Visual Object Recognition Precede the Shape Bias in Early Noun Learning

Abstract

Two of the most formidable skills that characterize human beings are language and our prowess in visual object recognition. They may also be developmentally intertwined. Two experiments, a large sample cross-sectional study and a smaller sample 6-month longitudinal study of 18- to 24-month-olds, tested a hypothesized developmental link between changes in visual object representation and noun learning. Previous findings in visual object recognition indicate that children’s ability to recognize common basic level categories from sparse structural shape representations of object shape emerges between the ages of 18 and 24 months, is related to noun vocabulary size, and is lacking in children with language delay. Other research shows in artificial noun learning tasks that during this same developmental period, young children systematically generalize object names by shape, that this shape bias predicts future noun learning, and is lacking in children with language delay. The two experiments examine the developmental relation between visual object recognition and the shape bias for the first time. The results show that developmental changes in visual object recognition systematically precede the emergence of the shape bias. The results suggest a developmental pathway in which early changes in visual object recognition that are themselves linked to category learning enable the discovery of higher-order regularities in category structure and thus the shape bias in novel noun learning tasks. The proposed developmental pathway has implications for understanding the role of specific experience in the development of both visual object recognition and the shape bias in early noun learning.

Using the axis of elongation to align shapes: Developmental changes between 18 and 24months of age

“…First, marked changes between 18 and 24 months have been reported in young children’s ability to recognize common objects – chairs, buckets, cars – from sparse major-part 3-dimensional representations of object shape (e.g., Smith, 2003; Pereira & Smith, 2009). This ability to recognize basic level categories from such sparse structural information, in turn, has been shown to be correlated with the size of individual children’s object name vocabularies (Smith, 2003; Pereira & Smith, 2009) and to the strength of the shape bias – the generalization of newly learned object names to new instances by similarity in shape (Yee et al, 2012). As noted in the introduction, during this same developmental period, when children are given objects to hold and visually examine, they increasingly orient those objects to oversample planar views (Pereira et al, 2010), views in which the major axis is extended in the frontal plane.…”

“…One line of studies (Augustine, Smith & Jones, 2011; Pereira & Smith, 2009; Smith 2003; Smith & Jones, 2011; Yee et al, 2012) presented toddlers with rich typical instances and also with sparse 3-dimensional representations of common objects (for example, a camera, ice cream cone, and hair brush) and in a forced choice task asked them to select the named object (e.g., where is the ice cream ?). The sparse representations consisted of only 2–3 geometric volumes representing major object parts in the correct spatial arrangement so as to convey the structural properties of the characteristic category shape but with no high frequency spatial information and no surface features.…”

“…Older children recognized instances of the named categories from these sparse 3-dimensional representations just as well as they did rich typical examples but the younger children only recognized the rich instances. Further, individual children’s abilities to recognize object categories from sparse structural shape representations were related to their familiarity with the tested basic level categories and to their ability to rapidly learn and generalize new object names (Augustine et al, 2011; Smith, 2003; Yee et al, 2012). Theories of visual object categorization see recognition based on the sparse geometry of 3-dimensional shape as a high-level visual skill that uses the major axis as the object-centric frame of reference (Marr & Nishihara, 1978; Biederman, 1987).…”

“…However, as several recent reviews note (Nishamura, Scherf & Behrmann, 2009; Smith, 2009), the development of visual object recognition has received little systematic attention beyond early infancy. The present experiments are motivated by recent findings indicating marked changes in the representation of object shape in the second year of life (Smith, 2009; Smith & Jones, 2011;Yee, Jones & Smith, 2012). The experiments specifically focus on one structural property of object shape –the most elongated axis – that has been proposed as a key frame of reference for object constancy and object categorization.…”

Recognising a zebra from its stripes and the stripes from “zebra”: the role of verbal labels in selecting category relevant information

“…For example, children prioritise shape when recognising members of familiar categories (e.g. Yee, Jones, & Smith, 2012) and when labelling novel categories (e.g. Perry & Samuelson, 2011;Perry, Samuelson, Malloy, & Schiffer, 2010) even at an age when they do not know any names for specific shapes, such as "square" or "triangle" (Dale & Fenson, 1996).…”