Home About us Contact
|
Home About us Contact | ||
|
|
||
Object Categories (object + category)
Selected AbstractsHigh-resolution multi-voxel pattern analysis of category selectivity in the medial temporal lobesHIPPOCAMPUS, Issue 6 2008Rachel A. Diana Abstract Although the parahippocampal cortex (PHc) is known to be critical for memory formation, little is known about what is encoded by this area. Using multi-voxel pattern analysis of high-resolution functional magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) data, we examined responses to blocks of categorically coherent stimuli and found that patterns of activity in PHc were selective for not only scenes, but also for other nonspatial object categories (e.g., faces and toys). This pattern of results was also found in the parahippocampal place area (PPA), indicating that this region is not sensitive exclusively to scenes. In contrast, neither the hippocampus nor perirhinal cortex (PRc) were found to be selective for category information. The results indicate that regions within the medial temporal lobe may support distinct functions, and that the PHc appears to be particularly sensitive to category-level information. © 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc. [source] Proper Names in Early Word Learning: Rethinking a Theoretical Account of Lexical DevelopmentMIND & LANGUAGE, Issue 4 2009D. GEOFFREY HALL There is evidence that children learn both proper names and count nouns from the outset of lexical development. Furthermore, children's first proper names are typically words for people, whereas their first count nouns are commonly terms for other objects, including artifacts. I argue that these facts represent a challenge for two well-known theoretical accounts of object word learning. I defend an alternative account, which credits young children with conceptual resources to acquire words for both individual objects and object categories, and conceptual biases to construe some objects (notably people) as individuals in their own right and most other objects as instances of their category. [source] The origins and evolution of links between word learning and conceptual organization: new evidence from 11-month-oldsDEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE, Issue 2 2003Sandra Waxman How do infants map words to their meaning? How do they discover that different types of words (e.g. noun, adjective) refer to different aspects of the same objects (e.g. category, property)? We have proposed that (1) infants begin with a broad expectation that novel open-class words (both nouns and adjectives) highlight commonalities (both category- and property-based) among objects, and that (2) this initial expectation is subsequently fine-tuned through linguistic experience. We examine the first part of this proposal, asking whether 11-month-old infants can construe the very same set of objects (e.g. four purple animals) either as members of an object category (e.g. animals) or as embodying a salient object property (e.g. four purple things), and whether naming (with count nouns vs. adjectives) differentially influences their construals. Results support the proposal. Infants treated novel nouns and adjectives identically, mapping both types of words to both category- and property-based commonalities among objects. [source] Information Sources for Noun LearningCOGNITIVE SCIENCE - A MULTIDISCIPLINARY JOURNAL, Issue 2 2005Edward Kako Abstract Why are some words easier to learn than others? And what enables the eventual learning of the more difficult words? These questions were addressed for nouns using a paradigm in which adults were exposed to naturalistic maternal input that was manipulated to simulate access to several different information sources, both alone and in combination: observation of the extralinguistic contexts in which the target word was used, the words that co-occurred with the target word, and the target word's syntactic context. Words that were not accurately identified from observation alone were both abstract (e.g., music) and concrete (e.g., tail). Whether a noun could be learned from observation depended on whether it labeled a basic-level object category (BLOC). However, the difference between BLOC labels and non-BLOC labels was eliminated when observation was supplemented with linguistic context. Thus, although BLOC labels can be learned from observation alone, non-BLOC labels require richer linguistic context. These findings support a model of vocabulary growth in which an important role is played by changes in the information to which learners have access. [source] | ||||||||||