The discriminating nature of infants' exploratory actions.

Palmer, Carolyn F.

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.25.6.885

Cited by 189 publications

(157 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

136

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Furthermore, different objects are manipulated in different ways. Children feel the surface more on objects that have surface structure than on objects that do not, and they shake or pound more on objects that produce a sound than on objects that do not (Gibson and Walker 1984;Lockman and McHale 1989;Palmer 1989;Bushnell and Boudreau 1993;Molina and Jouen 1998;Lockman 2005). Bourgeois et al (2005) suggest that future development that demands more complex abilities originates from this early adaptation of different objects.…”

Section: Manipulation Of Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The authors examined 14-to 26-month-old infants' understanding of the spatial relationships between objects and apertures in an object manipulation task. The task was to insert objects with various cross-sections (circular, square, rectangular, ellipsoid, and triangular) into fitting apertures. A successful solution required the infant to mentally rotate the object to be fit into the aperture and use that information to plan the action. The object was presented standing up in half of the trials; in the other half, it was lying down. The results showed that infants solved the problem consistently from age 22 months and that a successful solution was associated with appropriate preadjustments before the hand arrived with the block to the aperture. No sex differences were found.

show abstract

Section: Manipulation Of Objectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Örnkloo¹,

Hofsten²

2007

Developmental Psychology

119

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…They recognize affordances of objects and tailor their actions accordingly (Clifton, Rochat, Litovsky, & Perris, 1991;Lockman, Ashmead, & Bushnell, 1984;McCarty, Clifton, Ashmead, Lee, & Goubet,, 2001;von Hofsten & Ronnqvist, 1988;von Hofsten & Fazel-Zandy, 1984). In addition, young infants detect the functional relation between object parts and surfaces and use objects in ways that are consistent with these relations (Bourgeois, Khawar, Neal, & Lockman, 2005;Gibson & Walker, 1984;Molina & Jouen, 1998;Palmer, 1989;Ruff, 1984). Infants 8 to 18 months of age manipulate objects on the basis of the functions they afford (Freeman, Lloyd, & Sinha, 1980;Pier-LeBonniec, 1985), generalize functional properties to objects similar in appearance or that share important characteristics (Baldwin, Markman, & Melartin, 1993;Booth & Waxman, 2002a), and attend to novel ways objects can be used and imitate those actions (Meltzoff, 1988a,b).…”

Section: Increasing Infants' Sensitivity To Color By Making Color Funmentioning

confidence: 99%

Color–function categories that prime infants to use color information in an object individuation task

Wilcox

Woods

Chapa

2008

Cognitive Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

There is evidence for developmental hierarchies in the type of information to which infants attend when reasoning about objects. Investigators have questioned the origin of these hierarchies and how infants come to identify new sources of information when reasoning about objects. The goal of the present experiments was to shed light on this debate by identifying conditions under which infants' sensitivity to color information, which is slow to emerge, could be enhanced in an object individuation task. The outcome of Experiment 1 confirmed and extended previous reports that 9.5-month-olds can be primed, through exposure to events in which the color of an object predicts its function, to attend to color differences in a subsequent individuation task. The outcomes of Experiments 2 to 4 revealed age-related changes in the nature of the representations that support color priming. This is exemplified by three main findings. First, the representations that are formed during the colorfunction events are relatively specific. That is, infants are primed to use the color difference seen in the color-function events to individuate objects in the test events, but not other color differences. Second, 9.5-month-olds can be led to form more abstract event representations, and then generalize to other colors in the test events if they are shown multiple pairs of colors in the color-function events. Third, slightly younger 9-month-olds also can be led to form more inclusive categories with multiple color pairs, but only when they are allowed to directly compare the exemplars in each color pair during the present events. These results shed light on the development of categorization abilities, cognitive mechanisms that support color-function priming, and the kinds of experiences that can increase infants' sensitivity to color information.

show abstract

“…Object mouthing emerges early in infancy and increases between 15 and 20 weeks as reaching becomes productive (Rochat, 1989;Spencer, Vereijken, Diedrich, & Thelen, 2000). Mouthing peaks between 6 and 9 months and declines between 9.5 and 15.5 months, replaced by other forms of object exploration and manipulation (Belsky & Most, 1981;McCall, 1974;Palmer, 1989;Rochat, 1989;Ruff, 1984;Ruff et al, 1992;Whyte et al, 1994;Zelazo & Kearsley, 1980).…”

Section: Mouthing Peak and Consonant Productionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…NIH-PA Author Manuscript NIH-PA Author Manuscript infants shook a sounding bell more often than a bell without a clapper (Palmer, 1989). This preference for sound production extends to support surfaces and influences mouthing behavior: When presented with wood or foam-covered table surfaces and a bell without a clapper, 6-to 9-month-old infants tended to shake the bell in the foam -table condition and bang the bell against the table in the wood-table condition; in the foam-table condition, infants spent more time mouthing objects than they did in the wood-table condition (Palmer, 1989).…”

Section: Nih-pa Author Manuscriptmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Influence of Mouthing on Infant Vocalization

Fagan

Iverson²

2007

Infancy

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Although vocalization and mouthing are behaviors frequently performed by infants, little is known about the characteristics of vocalizations that occur with objects, hands, or fingers in infants' mouths. The purpose of this research was to investigate characteristics of vocalizations associated with mouthing in 6-to 9-month-old infants during play with a primary caregiver. Results suggest that mouthing may influence the phonetic characteristics of vocalizations by introducing vocal tract closure and variation in consonant production.Mouthing, defined as contact of an object with the mouth, lips, or tongue (Rochat, 1989;Ruff, Saltarelli, Capozzoli, & Dubiner, 1992), is a common behavior during infancy (Belsky & Most, 1981;Fenson, Kagan, Kearsley, & Zelazo, 1976;Kopp, 1976). In a study of 7.5− to 21-month-old infants (Belsky & Most, 1981), all 40 infants displayed mouthing behavior during play with toys between 7.5 and 13.5 months. In addition to its prominence across infants, mouthing is a regularly occurring behavior both in terms of number of occurrences and duration of episodes (Kopp, 1976;Ruff, 1984;Whyte, McDonald, Baillargeon, & Newell, 1994).Studies of mouthing have not typically examined vocalizations associated with episodes of mouthing. Moreover, studies of mouthing often focus on the mouthing of objects, less frequently investigating contact of the hands and fingers with infants' mouths. Elbers (1982), however, noted that between ages 6 and 12 months her son vocalized with the back of one hand against his mouth and while holding his fingers in his mouth. She interpreted both activities as variants in bringing about vocal tract closure and constriction. In an additional study of 4 infants between 6 and 11 months, Ejiri and Masataka (2001) documented both the frequent occurrence of mouthing and co-occurrences of mouthing and vocalization; however, they did not describe the characteristics of co-occurring vocalizations. Descriptions of vocalizations that co-occur with mouthing may be important for three reasons: Mouthing is an exploratory behavior that may extend to encompass exploration of co-occurring vocalizations; the peak period of mouthing behavior in infancy coincides with and may contribute to advances in consonant production; and mouthing, which appears to contribute to the development of multimodal object perception, may also contribute to the development of multimodal speech perception. Mouthing and ExplorationStudies documenting the exploratory nature of object-related mouthing have consistently shown that infants use mouthing as a means to explore object characteristics and discover what they afford for action (Fenson et al., 1976;Rochat, 1989;Ruff et al., 1992). Moreover, infants vary their approach to exploration to maximize the information they obtain (e.g., scratching objects to obtain information about their affordance for noise; Rochat, 1989) and exploit affordances differentially (e.g., fingering textured objects and mouthing patterned objects). The exploratory nature of mouth...

show abstract

The discriminating nature of infants' exploratory actions.

Cited by 189 publications

References 25 publications

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Fitting objects into holes: On the development of spatial cognition skills.

Color–function categories that prime infants to use color information in an object individuation task

The Influence of Mouthing on Infant Vocalization

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About