Optimal Contrast: Competition Between Two Referents Improves Word Learning

Zosh, Jennifer M.; Brinster, Meredith; Halberda, Justin

doi:10.1080/10888691.2013.748420

Cited by 53 publications

(59 citation statements)

References 67 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In the current study, 5 out of 12 children were correct on their first test trial, as compared to 3 out of 12 on the second and third trials, and 4 on the fourth trial. This pattern of results is consistent with recent pilot findings reported by Zosh et al, (2013) that performance is better on a single test trial than across multiple test trials-even when the same number of words are introduced during the learning phase and the test phase.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 82%

“…We presented children with four objects because this is common in the literature (e.g., Akhtar & Tomasello, 1996;Akhtar et al, 1996;Diesendruck et al, 2004;Moore, Angelopoulos, & Bennett, 1999;Samuelson & Smith, 1998), and because we wanted to use an established method (Akhtar et al, 2001). Moreover, recent research suggests that more than four objects can be too distracting for children even up to 38 months of age (Zosh, Brinster, & Halberda, 2013). Importantly, all children received the same exposure to the four novel objects.…”

Section: Not a Test Of Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Testing a word is not a test of word learning

Axelsson

Horst

2013

Acta Psychologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although vocabulary acquisition requires children learn names for multiple things, many investigations of word learning mechanisms teach children the name for only one of the objects presented. This is problematic because it is unclear whether children's performance reflects recall of the correct word-object association or simply selection of the only object that was singled out by being the only object named.Children introduced to one novel name may perform at ceiling as they are not required to discriminate on the basis of the name per se, and appear to rapidly learn words following minimal exposure to a single word. We introduced children to four novel objects. For half the children, only one of the objects was named and for the other children, all four objects were named. Only children introduced to one word reliably selected the target object at test. This demonstration highlights the oversimplicity of one-word learning paradigms and the need for a shift in word learning paradigms where more than one word is taught to ensure children disambiguate objects on the basis of their names rather than their degree of salience. Not A Test of Learning 3 Testing a Word is Not a Test of Word Learning

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Not a Test Of Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Testing a word is not a test of word learning

Axelsson

Horst

2013

Acta Psychologica

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, language researchers point out that making initial word-object associations is not the same as forming an enduring, rich understanding of a word that allows a child to generalize that word’s meaning to novel exemplars (Werker et al, 1998; Horst and Samuelson, 2008; Axelsson and Horst, 2013; Bion et al, 2013; Zosh et al, 2013). …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

All Tapped Out: Touchscreen Interactivity and Young Children’s Word Learning

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Touchscreen devices differ from passive screen media in promoting physical interaction with events on the screen. Two studies examined how young children’s screen-directed actions related to self-regulation (Study 1) and word learning (Study 2). In Study 1, 30 2-year-old children’s tapping behaviors during game play were related to their self-regulation, measured using Carlson’s snack task: girls and children with high self-regulation tapped significantly less during instruction portions of an app (including object labeling events) than did boys and children with low self-regulation. Older preschoolers (N = 47, aged 4–6 years) tapped significantly less during instruction than 2-year-olds did. Study 2 explored whether the particular way in which 170 children (2–4 years of age) interacted with a touchscreen app affected their learning of novel object labels. Conditions in which children tapped or dragged a named object to move it across the screen required different amounts of effort and focus, compared to a non-interactive (watching) condition. Age by sex interactions revealed a particular benefit of dragging (a motorically challenging behavior) for preschool girls’ learning compared to that of boys, especially for girls older than age 2. Boys benefited more from watching than dragging. Children from low socioeconomic status families learned more object names when dragging objects versus tapping them, possibly because tapping is a prepotent response that does not require thoughtful attention. Parents and industry experts should consider age, sex, self-regulation, and the physical requirements of children’s engagement with touchscreens when designing and using educational content.

show abstract

“…Evidence in support of this notion exists in studies on fast mapping by mutual exclusivity. Specifically, children fail to retain recently fast-mapped targets encountered in the absence of any competitors (Zosh et al, 2013, i.e., no contextual support), but they do retain targets encountered among a small number of competitors (e.g., 1, Zosh et al, 2013; 2, Horst et al, 2010, i.e., low attentional demands) and again fail to retain targets encountered with yet more competitors (Horst et al, 2010, i.e., high attentional demands). It is also possible that the amount of variability and contextual repetition that is needed to support word learning changes over development as working memory capacity and attention spans increase.…”

Section: Context and Repetition In Other Word Learning Situationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Context and repetition in word learning

Horst¹

2013

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Young children learn words from a variety of situations, including shared storybook reading. A recent study by Horst et al. (2011a) demonstrates that children learned more new words during shared storybook reading if they were read the same stories repeatedly than if they were read different stories that had the same number of target words. The current paper reviews this study and further examines the effect of contextual repetition on children's word learning in both shared storybook reading and other situations, including fast mapping by mutual exclusivity. The studies reviewed here suggest that the same cognitive mechanisms support word learning in a variety of situations. Both practical considerations for experimental design and directions for future research are discussed.

show abstract

Optimal Contrast: Competition Between Two Referents Improves Word Learning

Cited by 53 publications

References 67 publications

Testing a word is not a test of word learning

Testing a word is not a test of word learning

All Tapped Out: Touchscreen Interactivity and Young Children’s Word Learning

Context and repetition in word learning

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About