Both adults and young children possess powerful statistical computation capabilities—they can infer the referent of a word from highly ambiguous contexts involving many words and many referents by aggregating cross-situational statistical information across contexts. This ability has been explained by models of hypothesis testing and by models of associative learning. This article describes a series of simulation studies and analyses designed to understand the different learning mechanisms posited by the 2 classes of models and their relation to each other. Variants of a hypothesis-testing model and a simple or dumb associative mechanism were examined under different specifications of information selection, computation, and decision. Critically, these 3 components of the models interact in complex ways. The models illustrate a fundamental tradeoff between amount of data input and powerful computations: With the selection of more information, dumb associative models can mimic the powerful learning that is accomplished by hypothesis-testing models with fewer data. However, because of the interactions among the component parts of the models, the associative model can mimic various hypothesis-testing models, producing the same learning patterns but through different internal components. The simulations argue for the importance of a compositional approach to human statistical learning: the experimental decomposition of the processes that contribute to statistical learning in human learners and models with the internal components that can be evaluated independently and together.
Modeling Cross-Situational Word–Referent Learning
Abstract
Both adults and young children possess powerful statistical computation capabilities—they can infer the referent of a word from highly ambiguous contexts involving many words and many referents by aggregating cross-situational statistical information across contexts. This ability has been explained by models of hypothesis testing and by models of associative learning. This article describes a series of simulation studies and analyses designed to understand the different learning mechanisms posited by the 2 classes of models and their relation to each other. Variants of a hypothesis-testing model and a simple or dumb associative mechanism were examined under different specifications of information selection, computation, and decision. Critically, these 3 components of the models interact in complex ways. The models illustrate a fundamental tradeoff between amount of data input and powerful computations: With the selection of more information, dumb associative models can mimic the powerful learning that is accomplished by hypothesis-testing models with fewer data. However, because of the interactions among the component parts of the models, the associative model can mimic various hypothesis-testing models, producing the same learning patterns but through different internal components. The simulations argue for the importance of a compositional approach to human statistical learning: the experimental decomposition of the processes that contribute to statistical learning in human learners and models with the internal components that can be evaluated independently and together.Preview Only. This article cannot be rented because we do not currently have permission from the publisher.
/lp/psycarticles-reg/modeling-cross-situational-word-referent-learning-WkTNnIQlq1
Welcome to DeepDyve! Rent Premier Research Articles and Save Up to 90%
Preview Only
Modeling Cross-Situational Word–Referent Learning
Yu, Chen; Smith, Linda B.
Follow Psychological Review
, Volume 119 (1): 21
PsycARTICLES® – Jan 1, 2012
More Info
More Like This Article
View All dataSource[]=actageo&dataSource[]=aspet&dataSource[]=aaos&dataSource[]=aacc&dataSource[]=aacr&dataSource[]=aea&dataSource[]=aip&dataSource[]=ajnr&dataSource[]=ams&dataSource[]=aps_physical&dataSource[]=appi_book&dataSource[]=appi_journal&dataSource[]=apha&dataSource[]=asip&dataSource[]=asm&dataSource[]=asn&dataSource[]=aspb&dataSource[]=avs&dataSource[]=annual_reviews&dataSource[]=arxiv&dataSource[]=acm&dataSource[]=berghahn&dataSource[]=cabi&dataSource[]=clinical_trials&dataSource[]=dailymed&dataSource[]=degruyter&dataSource[]=du_press&dataSource[]=esa&dataSource[]=eu_press&dataSource[]=elsevier&dataSource[]=emerald&dataSource[]=ejtr&dataSource[]=emea&dataSource[]=epo&dataSource[]=faseb&dataSource[]=gsa&dataSource[]=health_affairs&dataSource[]=hindawi&dataSource[]=imanager&dataSource[]=imedpub&dataSource[]=informa_healthcare&dataSource[]=informs&dataSource[]=iop&dataSource[]=iucr&dataSource[]=iospress&dataSource[]=jbjs&dataSource[]=leftcoast&dataSource[]=lu_press&dataSource[]=mesharpe&dataSource[]=mary_ann_liebert&dataSource[]=medline&dataSource[]=mit_press&dataSource[]=nature&dataSource[]=oxford&dataSource[]=pier_professional&dataSource[]=pnas&dataSource[]=portlandpress&dataSource[]=psyc_articles&dataSource[]=psyc_books&dataSource[]=psyc_critiques&dataSource[]=plos_journal&dataSource[]=pubmed_central&dataSource[]=rsna&dataSource[]=rockefeller&dataSource[]=rcn&dataSource[]=ria&dataSource[]=rsc&dataSource[]=sage&dataSource[]=spie&dataSource[]=springer_journal&dataSource[]=springer&dataSource[]=taylor_francis&dataSource[]=aps&dataSource[]=the_scientist&dataSource[]=uc_press&dataSource[]=uspto_abstract&dataSource[]=wiley&dataSource[]=pct
© 2012 DeepDyve, Inc. All rights reserved.
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy
