Reinforcement Look at matched picture after sound ends & it moves 10 trials (5 of each pairing) 2 or 4 blocks (2 pairs of words, 2 pairs of swoops) Participants 31 infants did 4 blocks 35 infants did 2 blocks (2 pairs of swoops) 24 infants were controls and heard only one word and only one swoop across 2 blocks no possible matching picture Children Recruited at birth in local hospital Aged months (mean 21.16, s.d..25) 45 boys and 45 girls Results Proportion of looking time to correct picture: Words acking vs papping significantly greater than 0.5 (t 24 = 3.09, p =.005) tutty vs chetty not greater (t 29 = 1.65, p =.11) Swoops Combined swoops trials significantly greater than 0.5 (t 57 = 2.41, p =.019) Reaction time to correct and incorrect picture Words Significant difference overall (t 58 = 11.90, p <.001) Swoops Significant difference overall (t 31 = 5.51, p <.001) But looking faster to “incorrect” i.e. static picture Names that are not words: older infants still associate non- linguistic sounds with pictures. Katie Alcock, Kirsty Krawczyk Lancaster University Introduction Vocabulary burst: Late in 2nd year of life Word-object associations Word-situation associations Does a label need to be a spoken word? Not in sign language Not early in development Sound-object associations Woodward & Hoyne, 1999 Presented novel word and novel toy or novel sound and novel toy Asked children to choose: Can you get me the toma? Can you get me one of these ( squeak)? 13 months - associate either with a toy 20 months - only associate word with toy Interpretation Initially children will associate various input with objects Narrow this down to be only spoken words Graham & Kilbreath (2007) and Namy & Waxman (2002) - similar findings with gesture initial acceptance of both word and gesture by 22 or 26 months word is preferred Current study Investigating individual differences in word learning auditory processing graded learning task not all or nothing Setup Two pictures (out of a set of 8) 3 sec silence then sound Word: Look! Look at the chetty/tutty! Or swoop x 3 short pure-tone transitions of different sizes (Aslin 1989) followed by longer static-frequency pure tones Comparison tone with 350Hz transition, test tones with 75Hz or 150Hz (closer = harder) Association with other variables Significant correlations between proportion of correct looking on swoop blocks and: Receptive language on Preschool Language Scale (r 2 21 =.559, p =.008) Repetition of nonwords (Roy & Chiat, r 2 16 =.517, p =.04) Symbolic play (Saudino et al r 2 37 =.35, p =.034) No correlation between swoop blocks and productive language or nonverbal cognitive ability No significant correlations with correct looking on words blocks Learning that one picture will move and looking at that? Looking time and reaction time for control group No difference between picture that could move and other picture Discussion Associate word or swoop with picture Prefer to look at moving picture But think sound refers to static picture? (Houston-Price & Nakai, 2004) Not just learning that one picture will move Applies with swoops as well Children heard to attempt imitation of swoops! Association with other abilities More with receptive language than productive language But not specifically language abilities? Conclusion Can measure individual differences in strength/rate of association of a word with a situation Children can continue to associate a non- speech sound with a situation well into 2nd year of life Is this really “word” learning? Some word pairs seem to be learned well Others do not, and no significant correlation with language ability But nonverbal associations with expected variables including symbolic abilities References Aslin, R. N. (1989). Discrimination of frequency transitions by human infants. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 86(2), Graham, S. A., & Kilbreath, C. S. (2007). It's a sign of the kind: Gestures and words guide infants' inductive inferences. Developmental Psychology, 43(5), Houston-Price, C., & Nakai, S. (2004). Distinguishing novelty and familiarity effects in infant preference procedures. Infant and Child Development, 13(4), Namy, L. L., & Waxman, S. R. (2002). Patterns of spontaneous production of novel words and gestures within an experimental setting in children ages 1;6 and 2;2. Journal of Child Language, 29(4), Roy, P., & Chiat, S. (2004). A prosodically controlled word and nonword repetition task for 2-to 4-year-olds: Evidence from typically developing children. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 47(1), Saudino, K. J., Dale, P. S., Oliver, B., Petrill, S. A., Richardson, V., Rutter, M., et al. (1998). The validity of parent-based assessment of the cognitive abilities of 2-year-olds. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16(3), Woodward, A. L., & Hoyne, K. L. (1999). Infants' learning about words and sounds in relation to objects. Child Development, 70(1),