Abstract

Pictures are defined by their creator’s intentions and resemblance to their real world referents. Here we examine whether young children follow a realist route (e.g., focusing on how closely pictures resemble their referents) or intentional route (e.g., focusing on what a picture is intended to represent by its artist) when identifying a picture’s referent. In 3 experiments, we contrasted an artist’s intention with her picture’s appearance to investigate children’s use of appearance and intentional cues. In Experiment 1, children aged 3–4 and 5–6 years (N = 151) were presented with 4 trials of 3-object arrays (e.g., a pink duck, a blue duck, and a teddy). The experimenter photographed or drew 1 of the objects (e.g., blue duck), however, the subsequent picture depicted the referent in grayscale (black and white condition) or the color of its shape-matched object, for example, a pink duck (color change condition). Children were asked 3 questions regarding the identity of the pictures; responses were guided by intentional cues in the black and white condition, but appearance in the color change condition. Experiment 2 confirmed that appearance responses were not due to the artist’s changing knowledge state. Experiment 3 replicated the results of Experiment 1 with adult participants. Together, these studies show that children and adults are neither strictly realist nor intentional route followers. They are realists until resemblance cues fail, at which point they defer to intentional cues.

Highlights

  • Visual symbols can be arbitrary, bearing no resemblance to their referent, or iconic, closely resembling what they refer to in the world

  • A long-standing debate in the literature addresses exactly how children develop a theory of pictures and link pictures to real world referents

  • DeLoache, 2010), the imitation of actions seen in a picture book (Simcock & DeLoache, 2006), and the symbolic use of pictures, for instance, using photographs to identify which toys to place in a box (Callaghan, 2000)

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Visual symbols can be arbitrary, bearing no resemblance to their referent, or iconic, closely resembling what they refer to in the world. After Luna drew something that looked like a fish, children were asked if Luna had drawn a fish It was not until 8 years of age that children considered the mental state of the artist and did not name the pictures based upon their appearance. Children may have misinterpreted the question as asking, “Does Luna’s drawing look like a fish?” biasing them toward interpreting the picture based upon its appearance. This finding suggests that children may have difficulty taking intention into account when it conflicts with appearance. When asked what the drawing should be named, 84% of 4-year-olds and 94% of 7-year-olds gave appearance-based answers, as did adults, which supports a realist view of picture interpretation

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call