ArticleCognitive science2018
Learning Object Names at Different Hierarchical Levels Using Cross-Situational Statistics.
Article in Cognitive science, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed.
- Meaning-Events: The Sensorimotor Foundation for Lifespan Development of Meaning.Behavioral sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Seeking Meaning: Incorporating Linguistic Information in Cross-Situational Verb Learning.Cognitive science · 2025Article
- The effects of speaker and exemplar variability in children's cross-situational word learning.Psychonomic bulletin & review · 2024Article
- The effects of bilingualism on children's cross-situational word learning under different variability conditions.Journal of experimental child psychology · 2023Article
- Building lexical networks: Preschoolers extract different types of information in cross-situational learning.Journal of experimental child psychology · 2022Article
- Article
- Cross-situational Learning From Ambiguous Egocentric Input Is a Continuous Process: Evidence Using the Human Simulation Paradigm.Cognitive science · 2021Article
- Selective Attention in Early Word Learning: An Eye-Tracking Study on Viewing Naturalistic Egocentric Scenes.Infancy : the official journal of the International Society on Infant StudiesArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Objects in the world usually have names at different hierarchical levels (e.g., beagle, dog, animal). This research investigates adults' ability to use cross-situational statistics to simultaneously learn object labels at individual and category levels. The results revealed that adults were able to use co-occurrence information to learn hierarchical labels in contexts where the labels for individual objects and labels for categories were presented in completely separated blocks, in interleaved blocks, or mixed in the same trial. Temporal presentation schedules significantly affected the learning of individual object labels, but not the learning of category labels. Learners' subsequent generalization of category labels indicated sensitivity to the structure of statistical input.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.