Cited by 51Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentCategorization, perception, and languageLanguage Development and Disorders

Young children’s self-generated object views and object recognition

Open access
James, Karin H., Jones, Susan S., Smith, Linda B., Swain, Shelley N.·2014·Journal of Cognition and Development

Abstract

Two important and related developments in children between 18 and 24 months of age are the rapid expansion of object name vocabularies and the emergence of an ability to recognize objects from sparse representations of their geometric shapes. In the same period, children also begin to show a preference for planar views (i.e., views of objects held perpendicular to the line of sight) of objects they manually explore. Are children's emerging view preferences somehow related to contemporary changes in object name vocabulary and object perception? Children aged 18 to 24 months old explored richly detailed toy objects while wearing a head camera that recorded their object views. Both children's vocabulary size and their success in recognizing sparse three-dimensional representations of the geometric shapes of objects were significantly related to their spontaneous choice of planar views of those objects during exploration. The results suggest important interdependencies among developmental changes in perception, action, word learning, and categorization in very young children.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/15248372.2012.749481

Cites

23 of 23 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Humans learn by actively engaging and interacting with the world.

    “In contrast, humans learn by actively engaging and interacting with the world (James et al., 2014).”

    From Object-Centric Scene Representations Using Active Inference (2024) · cites this paper as James et al., 2014

    The opening section describes children’s manual exploration of objects as a possible step in learning to recognize them. The paper studies 18- to 24-month-olds and reports associations, so it does not establish the broader claim that humans generally learn through active engagement with the world. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • CCNs consist of a separate encoder-decoder model trained per object category, inspired by cortical columns, and reflect how toddlers interact with one object at a time.

    “These consist of a separate encoder-decoder model trained separately per object category, which is inspired by cortical columns in the brain (Hawkins et al., 2017), and reflect how toddlers typically interact with one object at a time (James et al., 2014).”

    From Object-Centric Scene Representations Using Active Inference (2024) · cites this paper as James et al., 2014

    In Method > Tasks and Measures (page unavailable), the paper describes giving children one object at a time to explore, retrieving each before handing over the next. This supports the one-object-at-a-time aspect of the citation, but it describes an experimental procedure rather than establishing that toddlers typically interact that way outside the task. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
James, K. H., Jones, S. S., Smith, L. B., & Swain, S. N.
Affiliations
Indiana University (US)
Corresponding author
James, Karin H.
Venue
Journal of Cognition and Development
Published
2014-07-03
Volume
15
Issue
3
Pages
393-401
ISSN
  • 1524-8372 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7647
OpenAlex
W2002549473
Cited by
51
References
23
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 1
FWCI
8.27
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Cognition and Development (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (acceptedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • UEA Digital Repository (University of East Anglia) (submittedVersion)
Funders
This research was supported in part by grants from the National Institute of Child Health and Development, HD 28675 and HD 057077.
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
Keywords
object recognition, object views, head-mounted camera, word learning, manual exploration, infant development, categorization

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review