Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-x5mqb Total loading time: 0.232 Render date: 2021-12-06T21:22:44.358Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

What categorical induction variability reveals about typical and atypical development

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2020

Lisa TECOULESCO*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA
Deborah FEIN
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA
Letitia R. NAIGLES
Affiliation:
Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269 USA
*
*Corresponding author: Lisa C. Tecoulesco, Child Language Lab, Attn: Lisa Tecoulesco, 406 Babbidge Road, U-20, Department of Psychological Sciences, University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT 06269-102. E-mail: lisa.tecoulesco@uconn.edu

Abstract

Categorical induction abilities are robust in typically developing (TD) preschoolers, while children with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD) frequently perform inconsistently on tasks asking for the transference of traits from a known category member to a new example based on shared category membership. Here, TD five-year-olds and six-year-olds with ASD participated in a categorical induction task; the TD children performed significantly better and more consistently than the children with ASD. Concurrent verbal and nonverbal tests were not significant correlates; however, the TD children's shape bias performance at two years of age was significantly positively predictive of categorical induction performance at age five. The shape bias, the tendency to extend a novel label to other objects of the same shape during word learning, appears linked with categorical induction ability in TD children, suggesting a common underlying skill and consistent developmental trajectory. Word learning and categorical induction appear uncoupled in children with ASD.

Type
Article
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abdel-Aziz, A., Kover, S., Wagner, M., & Naigles, L. (2018) The shape bias in children with ASD: potential sources of individual differences. Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research 61, 26852702.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alderson-Day, B., & McGonigle-Chambers, M. (2011). Is it a bird? Is it a plane? Category use in problem-solving in children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 41, 555565.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Allen, M. L., Haywood, S., Rajendran, G., & Branigan, H. (2011). Evidence for syntactic alignment in children with autism. Developmental Science, 14(3), 540548.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Booth, A. E., & Waxman, S. (2002). Object names and object functions serve as cues to categories for infants. Developmental Psychology, 38(6), 948957.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Booth, A. E., & Waxman, S. R. (2008). Taking stock as theories of word learning take shape. Developmental Science, 11(2), 185194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brandone, A. C. (2017). Changes in Beliefs About Category Homogeneity and Variability Across Childhood. Child Development, 88(3), 846866.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brandone, A. C., Gelman, S. A., & Hedglen, J. (2015). Children's developing intuitions about the truth conditions and implications of novel generics versus quantified statements. Cognitive Science, 39(4), 711738.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Brinchmann, E. I., Braeken, J., & Lyster, S. A. H. (2019). Is there a direct relation between the development of vocabulary and grammar?. Developmental Science, 22(1), e12709.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Carrow-Woolfolk, E. (1999). TACL-3: Test for auditory com- prehension of language-3. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.Google Scholar
Church, B. A., Krauss, M. S., Lopata, C., Toomey, J. A., Thomeer, M. L., Coutinho, M. V., Volker, M. A., & Mercado, E. (2010). Atypical categorization in children with high-functioning autism spectrum disorder. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 17(6), 862868.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Colunga, E., & Smith, L. B. (2008). Knowledge embedded in process: the self-organization of skilled noun learning. Developmental Science, 11(2), 195203.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Davidson, N. S., & Gelman, S. A. (1990). Inductions from novel categories: The role of language and conceptual structure. Cognitive Development 5, 151176.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deák, G. O., & Bauer, P. J. (1996). The dynamics of preschoolers' categorization choices. Child Development, 67(3), 740767.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dewar, K., & Xu, F. (2009). Do early nouns refer to kinds or distinct shapes? Evidence from 10-month-old infants. Psychological Science, 20(2), 252257.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diesendruck, G., & Bloom, P. (2003). How specific is the shape bias? Child Development, 74(1), 168178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Diesendruck, G., Markson, L., & Bloom, P. (2003). Children's reliance on creator's intent in extending names for artifacts. Psychological Science, 14(2), 164168.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Dunn, M., Gomes, H., & Sebastian, M. J. (1996). Prototypicality of responses of autistic, language disordered, and normal children in a word fluency task. Child Neuropsychology, 2(2), 99108.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ellawadi, A. B., Fein, D., & Naigles, L. R. (2017). Category structure and processing in 6-year-old children with autism. Autism Research, 10(2), 327336.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Elliott, C. D. (1990). Differential Ability Scales. San Antonio, TX: Psychological Corporation.Google Scholar
Fenson, L., Dale, P.S., Reznick, J.S., Thal, D.J., Bates, E., Hartung, J.P., Pethick, S., & Reilly, J.S. (1993) MacArthur-bates communicative development inventories: Users guide and technical manual. San Diego, CA: Singular Publishing Group.Google Scholar
Fernald, A., & Marchman, V. A. (2012). Individual differences in lexical processing at 18 months predict vocabulary growth in typically developing and late-talking toddlers. Child Development, 83(1), 203222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferry, A. L., Hespos, S. J., & Waxman, S. R. (2010). Categorization in 3‐and 4‐month‐old infants: An advantage of words over tones. Child Development, 81(2), 472479.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fiebelkorn, I. C., Foxe, J. J., McCourt, M. E., Dumas, K. N., & Molholm, S. (2013). Atypical category processing and hemispheric asymmetries in high-functioning children with autism: Revealed through high-density EEG mapping. Cortex, 49(5), 12591267.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Field, C., Allen, M. L., & Lewis, C. (2016). Attentional learning helps language acquisition take shape for atypically developing children, not just children with autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(10), 31953206.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fulkerson, A. L., & Waxman, S. R. (2007). Words (but not tones) facilitate object categorization: Evidence from 6-and 12-month-olds. Cognition, 105(1), 218228.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gastgeb, H. Z., Strauss, M. S., & Minshew, N. J. (2006). Do individuals with autism process categories differently? The effect of typicality and development. Child Development, 77(6), 17171729.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, S. A. (2003). The essential child: Origins of essentialism in everyday thought. Oxford Series in Cognitive Dev. New York: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, S. A., & Markman, E. M. (1986). Categories and induction in young children. Cognition, 23(3), 183209.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gelman, S. A., & Markman, E. M. (1987). Young children's inductions from natural kinds: The role of categories and appearances. Child Development, 15321541.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gotham, K., Pickles, A., & Lord, C. (2009). Standardizing ADOS scores for a measure of severity in autism spectrum disorders. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 39(5), 693705.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Graham, S. A., Gelman, S. A., & Clarke, J. (2016). Generics license 30-month-olds’ inferences about the atypical properties of novel kinds. Developmental Psychology, 52(9), 13531362.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gutheil, G., & Gelman, S. A. (1997). Children's use of sample size and diversity information within basic-level categories. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64(2), 159174.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartley, C., & Allen, M. L. (2014). Brief report: Generalisation of word–picture relations in children with autism and typically developing children. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 44(8), 20642071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hopkins, Z., Yuill, N., & Keller, B. (2016). Children with autism align syntax in natural conversation. Applied Psycholinguistics, 37(2), 347370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jaswal, V. K., & Markman, E. M. (2007). Looks aren't everything: 24-month-olds' willingness to accept unexpected labels. Journal of Cognition and Development, 8(1), 93111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keates, J., & Graham, S. A. (2008). Category markers or attributes: Why do labels guide infants' inductive inferences?. Psychological Science, 19(12), 12871293.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kelley, E., Paul, J. J., Fein, D., & Naigles, L. R. (2006). Residual language deficits in optimal outcome children with a history of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(6), 87102.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klinger, L. G., & Dawson, G. (2001). Prototype formation in autism. Development and Psychopathology, 13(1), 111124.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Landau, B., Smith, L. B., & Jones, S. S. (1988). The importance of shape in early lexical learning. Cognitive Development, 3(3), 299321.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lord, C., Rutter, M., DiLavore, P., Risi, S., Gotham, K., & Bishop, S. (2002). Autism diagnostic observation schedule: ADOS: Western Psychological Services Los Angeles.Google Scholar
Mawhood, L., Howlin, P., & Rutter, M. (2000). Autism and developmental receptive language disorder – A comparative follow-up in early adult life. I: Cognitive and language outcomes. The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry and Allied Disciplines, 41(5), 547559.Google ScholarPubMed
Mercado, E., & Church, B. A. (2016). Brief report: Simulations suggest heterogeneous category learning and generalization in children with autism is a result of idiosyncratic perceptual transformations. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 46(8), 28062812.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mottron, L., Dawson, M., Soulières, I., Hubert, B., & Burack, J. (2006). Enhanced perceptual functioning in autism: An update, and eight principles of autistic perception. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 36(1), 2743.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mullen, E.M. (1995). Mullen scales of infant development. Circle Pines, MN: American.Google Scholar
Naigles, L. R., & Chin, I. (2015). Language in children with autism spectrum disorders, in Bavin, E. L. and Naigles, L. R. (Eds.), Cambridge Handbook of Child Language (pp.637658). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Naigles, L. R., Kelley, E., Troyb, E., & Fein, D. (2013). Residual difficulties with categorical induction in children with a history of autism. Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders, 43(9), 20482061.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naigles, L. R., Kelty, E., Jaffery, R., & Fein, D. (2011). Abstractness and continuity in the syntactic development of young children with autism. Autism Research, 4(6), 422437.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Naigles, L., & Fein, D. (2017). Looking through their eyes: tracking early language comprehension in ASD. In Naigles, L. R. (Ed.) Innovative Investigations of Language in Autism, (pp.4969) New York, NY: APA Books.Google Scholar
Newman, R, Ratner, N.B., Jusczyk, A.M., Jusczyk, P.W., & Dow, K.A. (2006). Infants’ early ability to segment the conversational speech signal predicts later language development: A retrospective analysis. Developmental Psychology, 42, 643655.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Perry, L. K., & Samuelson, L. K. (2011). The shape of the vocabulary predicts the shape of the bias. Frontiers in Psychology, 2, 345.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plaisted, K. (2001). Reduced generalization in autism: An alternative to weak central coherence. In Burack, J., Charman, T., Yirmiya, N., & Zelazo, P. (Eds.), The development of autism: Perspectives from theory and research, (pp. 149169). Mahwah, NJ,: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Plaisted, K. C. (2000). Aspects of autism that theory of mind cannot explain. In Baron-Cohen, S., Tager-Flusberg, H., & Dohen, D. J. (Eds.), Understanding other minds: Perspectives from developmental cognitive neuroscience (2nd ed., pp. 224250). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ploog, B. O. (2010). Stimulus overselectivity four decades later: A review of the literature and its implications for current research in autism spectrum disorder. Journal of autism and Developmental Disorders, 40(11), 13321349.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Potrzeba, E. R., Fein, D., & Naigles, L. (2015). Investigating the shape bias in typically developing children and children with autism spectrum disorders. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 446.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rhodes, M., Brickman, D., & Gelman, S. A. (2008). Sample diversity and premise typicality in inductive reasoning: Evidence for developmental change. Cognition, 108(2), 543556.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Samuelson, L. K., & Smith, L. B. (1999). Early noun vocabularies: do ontology, category structure and syntax correspond?. Cognition, 73(1), 133.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sloutsky, V. M., & Fisher, A. V. (2004). Induction and categorization in young children: a similarity-based model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 133, 166188.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Smith, L. B. (1999). Children's noun learning: How general learning processes make specialized learning mechanisms. In MacWhinney, B. (Ed.), The emergence of language (pp. 277303). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Sparrow, S.S., Cicchetti, D.V., & Balla, D.A. (2005). Vineland adaptive behavior scales: second edition (vineland II), survey interview form/caregiver rating form. Livonia, MN: Pearson Assessments.Google Scholar
Szatmari, P., Bryson, S., Duku, E., Vaccarella, L., Zwaigenbaum, L., Bennett, T., & Boyle, M. H. (2009). Similar developmental trajectories in autism and Asperger syndrome: from early childhood to adolescence. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 50(12), 14591467.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tager-Flusberg, H. (1991). Semantic processing in the free recall of autistic children: Further evidence for a cognitive deficit. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 9(3), 417430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tek, S., Jaffery, G., Fein, D., & Naigles, L. R. (2008). Do children with autism spectrum disorders show a shape bias in word learning?. Autism Research, 1(4), 208222.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tovar, Á. E., Rodríguez-Granados, A., & Arias-Trejo, N. (2020). Atypical shape bias and categorization in autism: Evidence from children and computational simulations. Developmental Science, 23(2), e12885.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turner, L. M., Stone, W. L., Pozdol, S. L., & Coonrod, E. E. (2006). Follow-up of children with autism spectrum disorders from age 2 to age 9. Autism, 10(3), 243265.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waxman, S. & Booth, A. (2003). The origins and evolution of links between word learning and conceptual organization: New evidence from 11-month-olds. Developmental Science, 6(2), 128135.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waxman, S. R. & Braun, I. (2005). Consistent (but not variable) names as invitations to form object categories: New evidence from 12-month-old infants. Cognition, 95(3), B59B68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waxman, S. R., & Markow, D. B. (1995). Words as invitations to form categories: Evidence from 12-to 13-month-old infants. Cognitive Psychology, 29(3), 257302.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Welder, A. N., & Graham, S. A. (2001). The influence of shape similarity and shared labels on infants’ inductive inferences about nonobvious object properties. Child Development, 72(6), 16531673.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wodka, E. L., Mathy, P., & Kalb, L. (2013). Predictors of phrase and fluent speech in children with autism and severe language delay. Pediatrics, 131:17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Xu, F., Dewar, K., & Perfors, A. (2009). Induction, overhypotheses, and the shape bias: Some arguments and evidence for rational constructivism. In Hood, B. M. & Santos, L. (Eds), The Origins of Object Knowledge (pp.263284). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
1
Cited by

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

What categorical induction variability reveals about typical and atypical development
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

What categorical induction variability reveals about typical and atypical development
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

What categorical induction variability reveals about typical and atypical development
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response

Please enter your response.

Your details

Please enter a valid email address.

Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *