Individual differences in the shape bias in preschool children with specific language impairment and typical language development: theoretical and clinical implications

Abstract

We investigated whether preschool children with specific language impairment (SLI) exhibit the shape bias in word learning: the bias to generalize based on shape rather than size, color, or texture in an object naming context ('This is a wek; find another wek') but not in a non-naming similarity classification context ('See this? Which one goes with this one?'). Fifty-four preschool children (16 with SLI, 16 children with typical language [TL] in an equated control group, and 22 additional children with TL included in individual differences analyses but not group comparisons) completed a battery of linguistic and cognitive assessments and two experiments. In Experiment 1, children made generalization choices in object naming and similarity classification contexts on separate days, from options similar to a target object in shape, color, or texture. On average, TL children exhibited the shape bias in an object naming context, but children with SLI did not. In Experiment 2, we tested whether the failure to exhibit the shape bias might be linked to ability to detect systematicities in the visual domain. Experiment 2 supported this hypothesis, in that children with SLI failed to learn simple paired visual associations that were readily learned by children with TL. Analyses of individual differences in the two studies revealed that visual paired-associate learning predicted degree of shape bias in children with SLI and TL better than any other measure of nonverbal intelligence or standard assessments of language ability. We discuss theoretical and clinical implications.

Self‐generated variability in object images predicts vocabulary growth

“…Thus, it is possible that more "advanced" babies come to more informatively manipulate objects to create more variability in objects' images and then also through some independent pathway build larger vocabularies. There are also increasing indicators that children who are slow to grow their vocabularies show delays or disruptions in visual processes (Behrmann, Thomas, & Humphreys, 2006;Collisson, Grela, Spaulding, Rueckl, & Magnuson, 2015;Jones & Smith, 2005). The importance of a deeper understanding of the visual information-and the role of infant manipulations in generating that information-extends both to fundamental questions about visual object recognition and to understanding early object name learning.…”

Feature Biases in Early Word Learning: Network Distinctiveness Predicts Age of Acquisition

“…The majority of research on shape bias has been experimental in nature (e.g., Booth, Waxman, & Huang, ; Collisson, Grela, Spaulding, Rueckl, & Magnuson, ; Graham & Diesendruck, ). This research strongly supports a link between shape bias and word learning.…”

Not Only Size Matters: Early‐Talker and Late‐Talker Vocabularies Support Different Word‐Learning Biases in Babies and Networks

“…For example, 2‐ and 3‐year‐old late talkers extend the name of a novel solid object to other objects that match it in shape to a lesser extent than an age‐matched typically developing control group (Jones, ). Similarly, preschool children with specific language impairment show no shape bias compared with age‐ and SES‐matched typically developing controls (Collisson, Grela, Spaulding, Rueckl, & Magnuson, ). In fact, in one study, almost half of the late talkers systematically extended the novel name of a solid object to others matching in texture rather than shape (Jones, ).…”