Shannon M. Pruden

Children’s spatial thinking: Does talk about the spatial world matter?

In this paper we examine the relations between parent spatial language input, childrens own production of spatial language, and childrens later spatial abilities. Using a longitudinal study design, we coded the use of spatial language (i.e. words describing the spatial features and properties of objects; e.g. big, tall, circle, curvy, edge) from child age 14 to 46 months in a diverse sample of 52 parent-child dyads interacting in their home settings. These same children were given three non-verbal spatial tasks, items from a Spatial Transformation task (Levine et al., 1999), the Block Design subtest from the WPPSI-III (Wechsler, 2002), and items on the Spatial Analogies subtest from Primary Test of Cognitive Skills (Huttenlocher & Levine, 1990) at 54 months of age. We find that parents vary widely in the amount of spatial language they use with their children during everyday interactions. This variability in spatial language input, in turn, predicts the amount of spatial language children produce, controlling for overall parent language input. Furthermore, children who produce more spatial language are more likely to perform better on spatial problem solving tasks at a later age.

Explaining sex differences in mental rotation: role of spatial activity experience

Males consistently outperform females on mental rotation tasks, such as the Vandenberg and Kuse (1978) Perceptual and Motor Skills, 47(2), 599–604, mental rotation test (MRT; e.g. Voyer et al. 1995) in Psychological Bulletin, 117, 250–265. The present study investigates whether these sex differences in MRT scores can be explained in part by early spatial activity experience, particularly those spatial activities that have been sex-typed as masculine/male-oriented. Utilizing an online survey, 571 ethnically diverse adult university students completed a brief demographic survey, an 81-item spatial activity survey, and the MRT. Results suggest that the significant relation between sex of the participant and MRT score is partially mediated by the number of masculine spatial activities participants had engaged in as youth. Closing the gap between males and females in spatial ability, a skill linked to science, technology, engineering, and mathematics success, may be accomplished in part by encouraging female youth to engage in more particular kinds of spatial activities.

Infant categorization of path relations during dynamic events.

Fundamental to amassing a lexicon of relational terms (i.e., verbs, prepositions) is the ability to abstract and categorize spatial relations such as a figure (e.g., boy) moving along a path (e.g., around the barn). Three studies examine how infants learn to categorize path over changes in manner, or how an action is performed (e.g., running vs. crawling). Experiment 1 (n = 60) finds that 10- to 12-month-old English-learning infants categorize a figures path. In Experiment 2 (n = 27) categorization is disrupted when the ground object is removed, suggesting the relation between figure and ground defines the path. Experiment 3 (n = 24) shows that language may be a mechanism guiding category formation. These studies suggest that English-learning infants can categorize path, a component lexicalized in the worlds languages.

Find Your Manners: How Do Infants Detect the Invariant Manner of Motion in Dynamic Events?

To learn motion verbs, infants must be sensitive to the specific event features lexicalized in their language. One event feature important for the acquisition of English motion verbs is the manner of motion. This article examines when and how infants detect manners of motion across variations in the figures path. Experiment 1 shows that 13- to 15-month-olds (N = 30) can detect an invariant manner of motion when the figures path changes. Experiment 2 reveals that reducing the complexity of the events, by dampening the figures path, helps 10- to 12-month-olds (N = 19) detect the invariant manner. These findings suggest that: (a) infants notice event features lexicalized in English motion verbs, and (b) attention to manner can be promoted by reducing event complexity.

Preverbal Infants' Attention to Manner and Path: Foundations for Learning Relational Terms.

In the world, the manners and paths of motion events take place together, but in language, these features are expressed separately. How do infants learn to process motion events in linguistically appropriate ways? Forty-six English-learning 7- to 9-month-olds were habituated to a motion event in which a character performed both a manner and a path, and then tested on events that changed the manner, path, both, or neither. Infants detected each type of change, but only the girls showed evidence of processing manner and path as independent features. This gender difference provides clues about the universal development of manner and path concepts from more basic perceptual skills. Results have implications for how representations of linguistically relevant semantic elements develop conceptually.

Prelinguistic foundations of verb learning: Infants discriminate and categorize dynamic human actions.

Action categorization is necessary for human cognition and is foundational to learning verbs, which label categories of actions and events. In two studies using a nonlinguistic preferential looking paradigm, 10- to 12-month-old English-learning infants were tested on their ability to discriminate and categorize a dynamic human manner of motion (i.e., way in which a figure moves; e.g., marching). Study 1 results reveal that infants can discriminate a change in path and actor across instances of the same manner of motion. Study 2 results suggest that infants categorize the manner of motion for dynamic human events even under conditions in which other components of the event change, including the actors path and the actor. Together, these two studies extend prior research on infant action categorization of animated motion events by providing evidence that infants can categorize dynamic human actions, a skill foundational to the learning of motion verbs.

Do storybooks really break children's gender stereotypes?

Gender stereotypes—the features andcharacteristics assigned to men andwomen in a particular society—are preva-lent in children as young as the preschoolyears(MartinandRuble,2004).Forexam-ple, preschoolers can categorize toys asappropriate for either girls (e.g., dish-set) or boys (e.g., toolset), and play withthem according to gender expectations(Raag and Rackliff, 1998). Many fac-tors have been linked to the display anddevelopmentofgenderstereotypesinchil-dren, including the role of storybooksin shaping children’s gender stereotypes(Jennings, 1975; Ashton, 1983; Trepanier-Street et al., 1990; Green et al., 2004).Storybooks are believed to help childrenunderstand the roles of men and womenin society by reinforcing children’s ideasabout gender roles (i.e., what is typi-cally appropriate for men and women) or,alternatively, by

Parents’ Spatial Language Mediates a Sex Difference in Preschoolers’ Spatial-Language Use:

Do boys produce more terms than girls to describe the spatial world—that is, dimensional adjectives (e.g., big, little, tall, short), shape terms (e.g., circle, square), and words describing spatial features and properties (e.g., bent, curvy, edge)? If a sex difference in children’s spatial-language use exists, is it related to the spatial language that parents use when interacting with children? We longitudinally tracked the development of spatial-language production in children between the ages of 14 and 46 months in a diverse sample of 58 parent-child dyads interacting in their homes. Boys produced and heard more of these three categories of spatial words, which we call “what” spatial types (i.e., unique “what” spatial words), but not more of all other word types, than girls. Mediation analysis revealed that sex differences in children’s spatial talk at 34 to 46 months of age were fully mediated by parents’ earlier spatial-language use, when children were 14 to 26 months old, time points at which there was no sex difference in children’s spatial-language use.

Novel methodology to examine cognitive and experiential factors in language development: combining eye-tracking and LENA technology

Developmental systems theory posits that development cannot be segmented by influences acting in isolation, but should be studied through a scientific lens that highlights the complex interactions between these forces over time (Overton, 2013a). This poses a unique challenge for developmental psychologists studying complex processes like language development. In this paper, we advocate for the combining of highly sophisticated data collection technologies in an effort to move toward a more systemic approach to studying language development. We investigate the efficiency and appropriateness of combining eye-tracking technology and the LENA (Language Environment Analysis) system, an automated language analysis tool, in an effort to explore the relation between language processing in early development, and external dynamic influences like parent and educator language input in the home and school environments. Eye-tracking allows us to study language processing via eye movement analysis; these eye movements have been linked to both conscious and unconscious cognitive processing, and thus provide one means of evaluating cognitive processes underlying language development that does not require the use of subjective parent reports or checklists. The LENA system, on the other hand, provides automated language output that describes a child’s language-rich environment. In combination, these technologies provide critical information not only about a child’s language processing abilities but also about the complexity of the child’s language environment. Thus, when used in conjunction these technologies allow researchers to explore the nature of interacting systems involved in language development.

Toward a Neurobiological Basis for Understanding Learning in University Modeling Instruction Physics Courses

Modeling Instruction (MI) for University Physics is a curricular and pedagogical approach to active learning in introductory physics. A basic tenet of science is that it is a model-driven endeavor that involves building models, then validating, deploying, and ultimately revising them in an iterative fashion. MI was developed to provide students a facsimile in the university classroom of this foundational scientific practice. As a curriculum, MI employs conceptual scientific models as the basis for the course content, and thus learning in a MI classroom involves students appropriating scientific models for their own use. Over the last 10 years, substantial evidence has accumulated supporting MIs efficacy, including gains in conceptual understanding, odds of success, attitudes toward learning, self-efficacy, and social networks centered around physics learning. However, we still do not fully understand the mechanisms of how students learn physics and develop mental models of physical phenomena. Herein, we explore the hypothesis that the MI curriculum and pedagogy promotes student engagement via conceptual model building. This emphasis on conceptual model building, in turn, leads to improved knowledge organization and problem solving abilities that manifest as quantifiable functional brain changes that can be assessed with functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI). We conducted a neuroeducation study wherein students completed a physics reasoning task while undergoing fMRI scanning before (pre) and after (post) completing a MI introductory physics course. Preliminary results indicated that performance of the physics reasoning task was linked with increased brain activity notably in lateral prefrontal and parietal cortices that previously have been associated with attention, working memory, and problem solving, and are collectively referred to as the central executive network. Critically, assessment of changes in brain activity during the physics reasoning task from pre- vs. post-instruction identified increased activity after the course notably in the posterior cingulate cortex (a brain region previously linked with episodic memory and self-referential thought) and in the frontal poles (regions linked with learning). These preliminary outcomes highlight brain regions linked with physics reasoning and, critically, suggest that brain activity during physics reasoning is modifiable by thoughtfully designed curriculum and pedagogy.