Cargando…

Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?

In three experiments, we investigated Hebb repetition learning (HRL) differences between children and adults, as a function of the type of item (lexical vs. sub-lexical) and the level of item-overlap between sequences. In a first experiment, it was shown that when non-repeating and repeating (Hebb)...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Smalle, Eleonore H. M., Bogaerts, Louisa, Simonis, Morgane, Duyck, Wouter, Page, Michael P. A., Edwards, Martin G., Szmalec, Arnaud
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26779065
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01925
_version_ 1782408792613322752
author Smalle, Eleonore H. M.
Bogaerts, Louisa
Simonis, Morgane
Duyck, Wouter
Page, Michael P. A.
Edwards, Martin G.
Szmalec, Arnaud
author_facet Smalle, Eleonore H. M.
Bogaerts, Louisa
Simonis, Morgane
Duyck, Wouter
Page, Michael P. A.
Edwards, Martin G.
Szmalec, Arnaud
author_sort Smalle, Eleonore H. M.
collection PubMed
description In three experiments, we investigated Hebb repetition learning (HRL) differences between children and adults, as a function of the type of item (lexical vs. sub-lexical) and the level of item-overlap between sequences. In a first experiment, it was shown that when non-repeating and repeating (Hebb) sequences of words were all permutations of the same words, HRL was slower than when the sequences shared no words. This item-overlap effect was observed in both children and adults. In a second experiment, we used syllable sequences and we observed reduced HRL due to item-overlap only in children. The findings are explained within a chunking account of the HRL effect on the basis of which we hypothesize that children, compared with adults, chunk syllable sequences in smaller units. By hypothesis, small chunks are more prone to interference from anagram representations included in the filler sequences, potentially explaining the item-overlap effect in children. This hypothesis was tested in a third experiment with adults where we experimentally manipulated the chunk size by embedding pauses in the syllable sequences. Interestingly, we showed that imposing a small chunk size caused adults to show the same behavioral effects as those observed in children. Departing from the analogy between verbal HRL and lexical development, the results are discussed in light of the less-is-more hypothesis of age-related differences in language acquisition.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4703851
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-47038512016-01-15 Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning? Smalle, Eleonore H. M. Bogaerts, Louisa Simonis, Morgane Duyck, Wouter Page, Michael P. A. Edwards, Martin G. Szmalec, Arnaud Front Psychol Psychology In three experiments, we investigated Hebb repetition learning (HRL) differences between children and adults, as a function of the type of item (lexical vs. sub-lexical) and the level of item-overlap between sequences. In a first experiment, it was shown that when non-repeating and repeating (Hebb) sequences of words were all permutations of the same words, HRL was slower than when the sequences shared no words. This item-overlap effect was observed in both children and adults. In a second experiment, we used syllable sequences and we observed reduced HRL due to item-overlap only in children. The findings are explained within a chunking account of the HRL effect on the basis of which we hypothesize that children, compared with adults, chunk syllable sequences in smaller units. By hypothesis, small chunks are more prone to interference from anagram representations included in the filler sequences, potentially explaining the item-overlap effect in children. This hypothesis was tested in a third experiment with adults where we experimentally manipulated the chunk size by embedding pauses in the syllable sequences. Interestingly, we showed that imposing a small chunk size caused adults to show the same behavioral effects as those observed in children. Departing from the analogy between verbal HRL and lexical development, the results are discussed in light of the less-is-more hypothesis of age-related differences in language acquisition. Frontiers Media S.A. 2016-01-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4703851/ /pubmed/26779065 http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01925 Text en Copyright © 2016 Smalle, Bogaerts, Simonis, Duyck, Page, Edwards and Szmalec. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
spellingShingle Psychology
Smalle, Eleonore H. M.
Bogaerts, Louisa
Simonis, Morgane
Duyck, Wouter
Page, Michael P. A.
Edwards, Martin G.
Szmalec, Arnaud
Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?
title Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?
title_full Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?
title_fullStr Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?
title_full_unstemmed Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?
title_short Can Chunk Size Differences Explain Developmental Changes in Lexical Learning?
title_sort can chunk size differences explain developmental changes in lexical learning?
topic Psychology
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4703851/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26779065
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01925
work_keys_str_mv AT smalleeleonorehm canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning
AT bogaertslouisa canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning
AT simonismorgane canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning
AT duyckwouter canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning
AT pagemichaelpa canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning
AT edwardsmarting canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning
AT szmalecarnaud canchunksizedifferencesexplaindevelopmentalchangesinlexicallearning