New evidence for systematicity in infants’ curiosity-driven learning · 2018. 1. 15. · New...
1
New evidence for systematicity in infants’ curiosity-driven learning Han Ke 1* , Gert Westermann 1 Ben Malem 2 & Katherine Twomey 3* 1 Lancaster University 2 King’s College London, 3 University of Manchester *[email protected], [email protected] Literature Review Experiment 2 Experiment 1 Conclusions and future directions • Research demonstrate that infants’ exploration is sensitive to features of the environment, such as the complexity of object features (Younger & Fearing, 1998; Kovack-Lesh & Oakes, 2007). • Infancy studies typically employ carefully-designed experiments with complexity determined a priori. Whether infants systematically generate a particular level of difficulty during everyday, curiosity-driven exploration is therefore unknown. • Twomey & Westermann’s (2017) model of visual curiosity-driven learning predicted that infants will generate intermediate task complexity (cf. Kidd, Piantadosi & Aslin, 2012). Experiment 1 tests this hypothesis, while Experiment 2 extends this work to a naturalistic environment. Shape Priming paradigm. 12-month-old infants (label condition: n = 20, no-label condition, n = 20) - Shape Priming paradigm with 3D printed objects - 12-month-old infants (N = 18) - 6 prime-test pairs - Head-mounted eye tracking First-pick analysis Distance from prime Prime 1 22 2 10 3 23 4 33 Touch-sequence cluster analysis This work was supported by the ESRC International Centre for Language and Communicative Development (LuCiD), an ESRC Future Research Leaders fellowship to KT and a British Academy/Leverhulme Trust Senior Researcher Fellowship to GW. The support of the Economic and Social Research Council [ES/L008955/1; ES/N01703X/1] is gratefully acknowledged. Again, first pick showed a systematic pattern.X 2 (3) = 20.91, p = .004 Twomey, K. E., & Westermann, G. (2017). Curiosity-based learning in infants: A neurocomputational approach. Developmental Science, (October 2016), 1–13. http://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12629 Kidd, C., Piantadosi, S. T., & Aslin, R. N. (2012). The Goldilocks effect: Human infants allocate attention to visual sequences that are neither too simple nor too complex. PLoS ONE, 7(5), 1–8. http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036399 Prime: one extreme shape, 15s Test: remaining four objects, 30s Look-sequence cluster analysis Type 1 Type 2 First-look analysis Yes first looks are not randomly distributed! χ 2 (3) = 10.30, p = .016 Infants’ first looks are to low or intermediate distance stimuli • Infants from 12 months old show systematic patterns of exploration. • However, looking and picking exploration shows different systematic patterns – will infants show similar patterns of looking in Experiment 2 as in Experiment 1? • Exploratory styles do not differ between participants, so what drives this systematicity? Prime? Sequence length? Distance? Distance from prime First-look Silent Label 1 0.32 0.35 2 0.38 0.32 3 0.14 0.16 4 0.14 0.16 Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Infants’ first pick are to highest distance stimuli. Acknowledgement Head-mounted eye tracking video
Transcript of New evidence for systematicity in infants’ curiosity-driven learning · 2018. 1. 15. · New...
New evidence for systematicity in infants’ curiosity-driven learningHan Ke1*, Gert Westermann1 Ben Malem2 & Katherine Twomey3*
1Lancaster University 2King’s College London, 3University of Manchester*[email protected], [email protected]
Literature Review Experiment 2
Experiment 1
Conclusions and future directions
• Researchdemonstratethatinfants’explorationissensitivetofeaturesoftheenvironment,suchasthecomplexityofobjectfeatures(Younger&Fearing,1998;Kovack-Lesh &Oakes,2007).
• Infancystudiestypicallyemploycarefully-designedexperimentswithcomplexitydeterminedapriori.Whetherinfantssystematicallygenerateaparticularlevelofdifficultyduringeveryday,curiosity-drivenexplorationisthereforeunknown.
• Twomey&Westermann’s(2017)modelofvisualcuriosity-drivenlearningpredictedthatinfantswillgenerateintermediatetaskcomplexity(cf.Kidd,Piantadosi&Aslin,2012).Experiment1teststhishypothesis,whileExperiment2extendsthisworktoanaturalisticenvironment.
ShapePrimingparadigm.12-month-oldinfants (labelcondition:n=20,no-labelcondition,n=20)
- ShapePrimingparadigmwith 3Dprintedobjects- 12-month-oldinfants (N =18)- 6prime-testpairs- Head-mountedeyetracking
First-pickanalysis
Distance from prime
Prime
1 22
2 10
3 23
4 33
Touch-sequence cluster analysis
This work was supported by the ESRC International Centre for Language and Communicative Development (LuCiD), an ESRC Future Research Leaders fellowship to KT and a British Academy/Leverhulme Trust Senior Researcher Fellowship to GW. The support of the Economic and Social Research Council [ES/L008955/1; ES/N01703X/1] is gratefully acknowledged.
Again,firstpickshowedasystematicpattern. X2(3)=20.91,p=.004
Twomey,K.E.,&Westermann,G.(2017).Curiosity-basedlearningininfants:Aneurocomputationalapproach.DevelopmentalScience,(October2016),1–13.http://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12629
Kidd,C.,Piantadosi,S.T.,&Aslin,R.N.(2012).TheGoldilockseffect:Humaninfantsallocateattentiontovisualsequencesthatareneithertoosimplenortoocomplex.PLoSONE,7(5),1–8.http://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0036399
Prime:oneextremeshape,15s
Test:remainingfourobjects,30s
Look-sequenceclusteranalysis
Type1Type2
First-lookanalysis
Yesfirstlooksarenotrandomlydistributed!χ2(3)=10.30,p=.016
Infants’firstlooksaretoloworintermediatedistancestimuli
• Infantsfrom12monthsoldshowsystematicpatterns ofexploration.
• However,lookingandpickingexplorationshowsdifferentsystematicpatterns – willinfantsshowsimilarpatternsof
lookinginExperiment2asinExperiment1?• Exploratory stylesdonotdifferbetweenparticipants,so
whatdrivesthissystematicity?Prime?Sequencelength?Distance?
Distance from prime
First-lookSilent Label
1 0.32 0.35
2 0.38 0.32
3 0.14 0.16
4 0.14 0.16
Type1Type2
Type3
Infants’first pick aretohighest distancestimuli.
Acknowledgement
Head-mountedeyetrackingvideo
