儿童和成人利用运动学线索进行视觉预测和行动语言预测的发展过程

IF 1.8 2区 心理学 Q3 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Journal of Experimental Child Psychology Pub Date : 2024-09-17 DOI:10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106064
Saskia Melzel , Nicole Altvater-Mackensen , Kerstin Ganglmayer , Fabian Müller , Konstantin Steinmassl , Petra Hauf , Markus Paulus
{"title":"儿童和成人利用运动学线索进行视觉预测和行动语言预测的发展过程","authors":"Saskia Melzel ,&nbsp;Nicole Altvater-Mackensen ,&nbsp;Kerstin Ganglmayer ,&nbsp;Fabian Müller ,&nbsp;Konstantin Steinmassl ,&nbsp;Petra Hauf ,&nbsp;Markus Paulus","doi":"10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Expectations about how others’ actions unfold in the future are crucial for our everyday social interactions. The current study examined the development of the use of kinematic cues for action anticipation and prediction in 3-year-olds, 4-year-olds, 10-year-olds, and adults in two experiments. Participants observed a hand repeatedly reaching for either a close or far object. The motor kinematics of the hand varied depending on whether the hand reached for the close or far object. We assessed whether participants would use kinematic cues to visually anticipate (Experiment 1; <em>N</em>=98) and verbally predict (Experiment 2; <em>N</em>=80) which object the hand was going to grasp. We found that only adults, but not 3- to 10-year-olds, based their visual anticipations on kinematic cues (Experiment 1). This speaks against claims that action anticipations are based on simulating others’ motor processes and instead provides evidence that anticipations are based on perceptual mechanisms. Interestingly, 10-year-olds used kinematic cues to correctly verbally predict the target object, and 4-year-olds learned to do so over the trials (Experiment 2). Thus, kinematic cues are used earlier in life for explicit action predictions than for visual action anticipations. This adds to a recent debate on whether or not an implicit understanding of others’ actions precedes their ability to verbally reason about the same actions.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":48391,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","volume":"249 ","pages":"Article 106064"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096524002042/pdfft?md5=5026df01d5ea9a007b982a23c310c18c&pid=1-s2.0-S0022096524002042-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The development of children’s and adults’ use of kinematic cues for visual anticipation and verbal prediction of action\",\"authors\":\"Saskia Melzel ,&nbsp;Nicole Altvater-Mackensen ,&nbsp;Kerstin Ganglmayer ,&nbsp;Fabian Müller ,&nbsp;Konstantin Steinmassl ,&nbsp;Petra Hauf ,&nbsp;Markus Paulus\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.jecp.2024.106064\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Expectations about how others’ actions unfold in the future are crucial for our everyday social interactions. The current study examined the development of the use of kinematic cues for action anticipation and prediction in 3-year-olds, 4-year-olds, 10-year-olds, and adults in two experiments. Participants observed a hand repeatedly reaching for either a close or far object. The motor kinematics of the hand varied depending on whether the hand reached for the close or far object. We assessed whether participants would use kinematic cues to visually anticipate (Experiment 1; <em>N</em>=98) and verbally predict (Experiment 2; <em>N</em>=80) which object the hand was going to grasp. We found that only adults, but not 3- to 10-year-olds, based their visual anticipations on kinematic cues (Experiment 1). This speaks against claims that action anticipations are based on simulating others’ motor processes and instead provides evidence that anticipations are based on perceptual mechanisms. Interestingly, 10-year-olds used kinematic cues to correctly verbally predict the target object, and 4-year-olds learned to do so over the trials (Experiment 2). Thus, kinematic cues are used earlier in life for explicit action predictions than for visual action anticipations. This adds to a recent debate on whether or not an implicit understanding of others’ actions precedes their ability to verbally reason about the same actions.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48391,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology\",\"volume\":\"249 \",\"pages\":\"Article 106064\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096524002042/pdfft?md5=5026df01d5ea9a007b982a23c310c18c&pid=1-s2.0-S0022096524002042-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096524002042\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Experimental Child Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022096524002042","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

对他人未来行动展开的预期对我们的日常社会交往至关重要。本研究通过两项实验,考察了 3 岁儿童、4 岁儿童、10 岁儿童和成人在使用运动学线索进行行动预期和预测方面的发展情况。参与者观察一只手反复伸向近处或远处的物体。根据手伸向近处或远处物体的不同,手的运动运动学也有所不同。我们评估了参与者是否会利用运动学线索来视觉预测(实验 1;98 人)和口头预测(实验 2;80 人)手要抓住哪个物体。我们发现,只有成年人,而不是 3 至 10 岁的儿童,会根据运动学线索进行视觉预测(实验 1)。这与动作预测是基于模拟他人的运动过程的说法相悖,反而提供了预测是基于知觉机制的证据。有趣的是,10 岁儿童利用运动学线索正确地口头预测目标物体,而 4 岁儿童在实验中也学会了这样做(实验 2)。因此,与视觉动作预测相比,运动学线索更早用于明确的动作预测。这就为最近关于对他人动作的内隐理解是否先于对相同动作的口头推理能力的争论增添了新的内容。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
The development of children’s and adults’ use of kinematic cues for visual anticipation and verbal prediction of action

Expectations about how others’ actions unfold in the future are crucial for our everyday social interactions. The current study examined the development of the use of kinematic cues for action anticipation and prediction in 3-year-olds, 4-year-olds, 10-year-olds, and adults in two experiments. Participants observed a hand repeatedly reaching for either a close or far object. The motor kinematics of the hand varied depending on whether the hand reached for the close or far object. We assessed whether participants would use kinematic cues to visually anticipate (Experiment 1; N=98) and verbally predict (Experiment 2; N=80) which object the hand was going to grasp. We found that only adults, but not 3- to 10-year-olds, based their visual anticipations on kinematic cues (Experiment 1). This speaks against claims that action anticipations are based on simulating others’ motor processes and instead provides evidence that anticipations are based on perceptual mechanisms. Interestingly, 10-year-olds used kinematic cues to correctly verbally predict the target object, and 4-year-olds learned to do so over the trials (Experiment 2). Thus, kinematic cues are used earlier in life for explicit action predictions than for visual action anticipations. This adds to a recent debate on whether or not an implicit understanding of others’ actions precedes their ability to verbally reason about the same actions.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
7.70%
发文量
190
期刊介绍: The Journal of Experimental Child Psychology is an excellent source of information concerning all aspects of the development of children. It includes empirical psychological research on cognitive, social/emotional, and physical development. In addition, the journal periodically publishes Special Topic issues.
期刊最新文献
The relation of verbal and nonverbal skills to basic numerical processing of preterm versus term-born preschoolers. Do children match described probabilities? The sampling hypothesis applied to repeated risky choice. Is counting a bad idea? Complex relations among children's fraction knowledge, eye movements, and performance in visual fraction comparisons. Can gamification improve children's performance in mental rotation? Examining the factor structure of the home learning environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1