Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T01:49:32.588Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Infant perception of gestural contrasts: prerequisites for the acquisition of a visually specified language*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2008

John J. Carroll  and
Eleanor J. Gibson
John J. Carroll*
Affiliation:
Cornell University
Eleanor J. Gibson
Affiliation:
Cornell University
*
John J. Carroll, Department of Psychology 282NI, Northeastern University, 360 Huntington Ave., Boston, MA 02115, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Research is reported which investigated the ability of 4-month-old hearing infants to discriminate between gestures, derived from American Sign Language (ASL), that differ solely in terms of contrasts along underlying movement dimensions. Using an habituation–dishabituation task, it is shown that young infants can make such discriminations for global movement contrasts as well as contrasts along a single movement dimension. Thus, at four months, infants possess certain prerequisite perceptual abilities for the analysis of the signs of a visually specified language. Partial failure to dishabituate to another movement contrast, however, suggests that readiness to utilize the information in gestural events may vary depending on the movement in question. Results are contrasted to infant speech perception findings and implications for further research in the development of sign perception are discussed.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 13 , Issue 1 , February 1986 , pp. 31 - 49
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was supported by grant number B-560 from the Spencer Foundation. Portions of this research were presented at the 1982 meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Austin, Texas.

References

REFERENCES

Aslin, R. N., Pisoni, D. B. & Jusczyk, P. W. (1983). Auditory development and speech perception in infancy. In Mussen, P. (ed.), The handbook of child psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Banks, M. S. & Salapatek, P. (1983). Infant visual perception. In Mussen, P. (ed.), The handbook of child psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Bower, T. G. R. (1965). The determinants of perceptual unity in infancy. PsychonScience. 3. 323–4.Google Scholar
Bower, T. G. R. (1967). Phenomenal identity and form perception in an infant. PercepPsychophys. 2. 74–6.Google Scholar
Bower, T. G. R., Broughton, J. M. & Moore, M. K. (1971). Development of the object concept as manifested in tracking behavior of infants between 7 and 20 weeks of age. JExpChPsych. 11. 182–93.Google ScholarPubMed
Carpenter, G. C. (1974). Visual regard of moving and stationary faces in early infancy. MPQ 20. 181–4.Google Scholar
Cutting, J. E. & Rosner, B. S. (1974). Categories and boundaries in speech and music. PercepPsychophys. 16. 564–71.Google Scholar
Eimas, P. D. (1974). Auditory and linguistic processing of cues for place of articulation by infants. PercepPsychophys. 16. 513–21.Google Scholar
Eimas, P. D. (1982). Speech perception: a view of the initial state and perceptual mechanisms. In Mehler, J., Walker, E. & Garrett, M. (eds), Perspectives on mental representation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Eimas, P. D. & Miller, J. L. (1980 a). Contextual effects in infant speech perception. Science 209. 1140–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eimas, P. D. (1980 b), Discrimination of the information for manner of articulation by young infants. InfBehavDev. 3. 367–75.Google Scholar
Eimas, P. D., Siqueland, E. R., Jusczyk, P. & Vigorito, J. (1971). Speech perception in infants. Science. 171. 303–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fantz, R. L., Fagan, J. F. & Miranda, S. B. (1975). Early visual selectivity. In Cohen, L. & Salapatek, P. (eds), Infant perception: from sensation to cognition. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Field, J. (1976). Relation of young infant's reaching to stimulus distance and solidity. DevPsych. 12. 444–8.Google Scholar
Fox, R. & McDaniel, C. (1982). The perception of biological motion by human infants. Science 218. 486–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, E. J., Owsley, C. J. & Johnston, J. (1978). Perception of invariants by five-month-old infants: discrimination of two types of motion. DevPsych. 14. 407–15.Google Scholar
Gibson, E. J., Owsley, C. J., Walker, A. & Megaw-Nyce, J. (1979). Development of the perception of invariants: substance and shape. Perception. 8. 609–19.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gibson, E. J. & Spelke, E. S. (1983). The development of perception. In Mussen, P. (ed.), The handbook of child psychology. Vol. 2. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Jusczyk, P. W. (1982). Auditory versus phonetic coding of speech signals during infancy. In Mehler, J., Walker, E. & Garrett, M. (eds), Perspectives on mental representation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Kellman, P. J. & Spelke, E. S. (1983). Perception of partly occluded objects in infancy. CogPsych. 15. 483–524.Google ScholarPubMed
Klima, E. S. & Bellugi, U. (1979). The signs of language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Kuhl, P. K. & Miller, J. D. (1978). Speech perception by the chinchilla: identification functions for synthetic VOT stimuli. JASA. 63. 905–17.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leslie, A. M. (1982). The perception of causality in infants. Perception. 11. 173–86.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. L. & Eimas, P. D. (1983). Studies on the categorization of speech by infants. Cognition. 13. 135–65.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Miller, J. L. & Liberman, A. M. (1979). Some effects of later-occurring information on the perception of stop consonants and semivowels. PercepPsychophys. 25. 457–65.Google Scholar
Moffit, A. R. (1971). Consonant cue perception by twenty to twenty-four week old infants. ChDev. 42. 717–31.Google Scholar
Newport, E. (1982). Task specificity in language learning? Evidence from speech perception and American Sign Language. In Wanner, E. & Gleitman, L. (eds), Language acquisition: the state of the art. Cambridge: C.U.P.Google Scholar
Poizner, H. (1981). Visual and ‘phonetic’ coding of movement: evidence from American Sign Language. Science. 212. 691–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Poizner, H., Bellugi, U. & V., Lutes-Driscoll (1981). Perception of American Sign Language in dynamic point-light displays. JExpPsych(HumPerceptPerform). 7. 430–40.Google ScholarPubMed
Salapatek, P. (1975). Pattern perception in early infancy. In Cohen, L. & Salapatek, P. (eds), Infant perception: from sensation to cognition. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Stokoe, W., Casterline, D. & Croneberg, C. (1965). A dictionary of American Sign Language. Washington: Gallaudet College Press.Google Scholar
Werner, J. S. & Lipsitt, L. P. (1981). The infancy of human sensory systems. In Gollin, E. (ed.), Developmental plasticity. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar