Does object naming aid 12-month-olds' formation of novel object categories?

By Anne L. Fulkerson, R. A. Haaf. 2006

24 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF OBJECT CATEGORIZATION IN YOUNG CHILDREN: HIERARCHICAL INCLUSIVENESS, AGE, PERCEPTUAL ATTRIBUTE, AND GROUP VERSUS INDIVIDUAL ANALYSES (2010, background): “Thus, much anthropological, cognitive, and developmental work supports the primacy of middle-level (L2) categorization (see also Fulkerson & Haaf, 2006; Mervis, 1987; Mervis & Rosch, 1981; Murphy, 2002): Research in both language acquisition and categorization converges on the precedence of…”
Two aspects of young children’s thinking about different types of dynamic triangles: prototypicality and inclusion (2015, result): “This is also in concert with recent work in early childhood psychology research (see, e.g. Fulkerson & Haaf 2006), which has reported about the powerful link between object naming and object categorisation.”
Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The typological prevalence hypothesis (2009, background): “(See Bowerman, 2005, for a recent overview of the role of category size in crosslinguistic perspective; and see also Fulkerson & Haaf, 2006, for experimental evidence that, in the domain of novel objects, 12-month-old children can learn narrow categories with the help of linguistic labeling more…”