1. Frances Balcomb Temple University
Convergence and divergence in representational systems - place learning and language in young children
Frances Balcomb
Temple University 1

2. Emergent place learning in the Morris water maze
Early expressive language
What does early place learning look like?
How does PL relate to other types of spatial navigation?
How does PL relate to other types of cognitive development? 2

3. Funding provided by Spatial Intelligence and Learning Center
National Science Foundation Science of Learning 3

4. Why study space… 4

5. Space and Language Complementary representational systems
Undergo rapid development from about months
Vocabulary explosion, 2-word combinations
Shift from ego to allocentric, place learning
When you put space and language together, you merge two very powerful representational systems and level up 5

6. Spatial Representation
Allows for representation in non-linear, non-linguistic domains
Is evident in
Gesture
Drawings
Language
“looking forward to it”
“In the back of my mind” 6

7. Space and Language Complementary representational systems
Undergo rapid development from about months
Vocabulary explosion, 2-word combinations
Shift from ego to allocentric, place learning
When you put space and language together, you merge two very powerful representational systems and level up 7

8. Space and Language - Dissociations
Working Memory
Baddeley: phonological loop & visuospatial sketchpad
Standard Intelligence
WAIS - perceptual-organization and verbal composites
Woodcock-Johnson - visuo-spatial and phonemic awareness clusters
Brain areas
Language: Broca’s & Wernicke’s
Space: hippocampus et al 8

9. Space and Language - Connections
Specificity Hypothesis (Gopnik & Meltzoff 1986, 1987)
Evidence from children with Williams Syndrome
Landau & Zukowski, path terms (prepositions)
Phillips, Jarrold, Baddeley, Grant, & Karmiloff-Smith (2004)
In, on, above, below, in front, behind, shorter/smaller, longer/bigger
Brain areas may overlap
Temporal lobe, parahippocampus, dorsal and ventral streams 9

10. Summary
In some aspects space and language are able to function independently and can be accessed separately
If you look in the right places, they appear to be inter-linked 10

11. Foundational Processes
Language is well - studied
Space is less well-studied 11

12. Place Learning Navigational techniques Egocentric Allocentric dg
Retrace your steps
Allocentric
Landmarks
Place learning dg 12

13. What is known about early navigation?13

14. What is known about early navigation?
Ordered progression of skill development
ego-centric, beacon/landmark, place learning
Dynamic use of spatial skills, even early in development
Familiarity, cue salience, task demands 14

15. Acredolo & Evans, 1980 6-, 9-, & 11-month-olds
Modified version of the plus-maze
No feature, plain feature, salient feature, salient indirect feature 15

16. “tone” 16

17. “tone” 17

18. “tone”
egocentric
allocentric 18

19. No Cue
“tone” 19

20. Non-Salient Cue
“tone” 20

21. Salient Direct Cue
“tone” 21

22. Salient Indirect Cue
“tone” 22

23. Results Cue Type age None Non Salient Salient Direct Salient Indirect
6 months
Ego
Mixed
9 months
Ego (mixed)
Allo
11 months
Ego & Allo (mixed)
Mixed (allo) 23

24. How does this compare to adults and non-humans?
After few trials - place response
After many trials - shift to egocentric
Individual variability exists 24

25. Brain - behavior issues
Strategy types related to
caudate/striatum (egocentric/response learning
hippocampus (place)
May be competitive (Compton et al, 2004)
HC learning vs Caudate
HC fast, not dependent on feedback
Caudate - slower, dependent on error signal
In development the picture is not so clear 25

26. What is known about early navigation?
Place emerges rapidly between months
Children begin to use external cues to improve search accuracy
Newcombe, Huttenlocher, & Drummey, & Wiley (1998)
Children begin to use relational searches
Sluzenski, Newcombe & Satlow (2004) 26

27. Newcombe et al 1998 X X 27

28. Newcombe et al 1998
Feature3
Feature1 X
Feature2 28

29. Newcombe et al, 1998 Newcombe, Huttenlocher, Drummey & Wiley
(1998), Cognitive Development 29 29

30. Research Questions
Are there individual differences in early place learning abilities?
Do language and spatial representations develop independently?
What is the relationship between the developing brain and emergent behavior?
Relationship between place learning and other navigation types 30

31. Morris Water Maze 31

32. Morris Water Maze
Room Cue 3
Room Cue 1
Room Cue 2 32

33. Morris Water Maze
Because this task has been well researched in adults and non-human animals we know
Hippocampal dependent
Good performance looks different from poor performance
There are gender differences in adults
Aging adults differ from younger adults 33

34. Morris water maze for kids34

35. Methods Subjects Children aged 16-24 months, (m=20.6) N=32 Tasks
Parents - language measure
Children - place learning 35

36. Expressive Language MacArthur Communicative Inventory for Toddlers
Parent report
226 word checklist - expressive language only
100 Nouns, 100 verbs, 26 prepositions 36

37. Place Learning Materials
10’ diameter carpeted circle divided into squares, off center
Battery operated puzzle
Tasks
Locate puzzle hidden under carpet
Remember puzzle location 37

38. 38

39. cueA
cueC
cueD
cueB X X 39

40. Procedures Familiarization Learning
4 trials to learn the puzzle’s location
Different points of entry
Test
Same as learning trials
No puzzle
Control
Control for motivation & walking speed
Puzzle clearly visible 40

41. 41

42. Predictions Place Learning Older children > younger (goal-finding)
Language
Older children > younger (more expressive vocabulary)
Place learning & language
No correlation between overall language and PL
Correlation between prepositions & PL
Often in development it’s very hard to find correlations with language 42

43. Results 43

44. Results Age correlates with # times goal found: r(26)=.63, p<.001
Expressive language: r(26)=.7, p<.001
Partial out age
No correlation between # times goal found and expressive language r(25)=.19, p=.35 44

45. 45

46. 46

47. 47

48. 48

49. More detailed analyses
Search types
Spatial (perimeter, correct quad)
Non spatial (under self, other, unrelated)
Language
Nouns, verbs, preps, total lang, relational lang (verbs + prepositions) 49

50. Peripheral Searches (proximal cue use)
cueA
cueC
cueD
cueB X 50

51. X Correct Quadrant Search (distal cue use = place learning) cueA cueC
cueD
cueB X 51

52. Non-spatial searches Under self (child lifts tile under him/herself)
Under other (child approaches experimenter & lifts tile under her)
Unrelated - none of the above 52

53. Unrelated Searches
cueA
cueC
cueD
cueB X 53

54. searches, age, and goal finding
Intercorrelations between search type, age and goal finding
Measure
Age
Spatial
Non-spatial
# times goal found --
.45*
-.62*
.63*
.-73*
.46 *
-.48 * 54

55. Type of search and goal finding by age55

56. 56

57. Types of Spatial Searches with Age57

58. Space and Language
Intercorrelations between language and spatial searches
Measure
Nouns
Verbs
Preps
# times goal found
# searches under “other” --
.83
.67
.21 (.30)
.33 (.09)
.79
.11 (.59)
.38 (.05)
.39 (.05)
.23 (.25)
-.34 (.08) 58

59. 59

60. 60

61. Summary
Place learning and expressive language develop independently with age in month old children
Evidence of spatial searching 1-2 months before reliable goal finding
Rapid change at around months
Acquisition of prepositions and place learning correlate
Convergent evidence comes from research with children who have Williams Syndrome
Acquisition of other language marginally correlates with searching under a person (social?)
Interestingly, though, in this task it’s misleading 61

62. Representations that rely on understanding spatial relationships between objects emerge behaviorally (successful goal searches) and linguistically (prepositions) on a developmentally related timescale 62

63. Future Directions Modified plus maze
What affects differential weighting
Caudate - HC competition?
Episodic-like/context-dependent memory
Get a job 63