Co-­‐development  of  Spatial  Skills  and  Language  (Lead  Researcher:  Hilary  Miller)    

Many  cognitive  skills  develop  together  in  early  childhood,  making  it  difficult  to  determine  whether  some  skills  depend  on  others.  Much  of  our  prior  research  has  focused  on  children’s  spatial  skills,  which  may  be  supported  by  learning  spatial  words.  To  test  how  spatial   language  might   relate   to   children’s   spatial   skills,  we   compared   4-­‐year-­‐olds’   performance   across   various   spatial   tasks—imagining  how  two  pieces  of  a  shape  form  one  shape,  mentally  rotating  a  picture  to  find  another  that  matches,  or  picking  which  two  pictures  show  the  same  spatial  relations—to  their  ability  to  describe  verbally  where  a  mouse  was  in  a  spatial  scene.  We  were  particularly  interested  in  what  kinds  of  words  kids  chose  to  describe  where  the  mouse  was  when  some  of  the  objects  in  the  scene  looked  the  same—did  they  use  only  location  words,  or  did  they  also  use  size  and  color  words?  In  different  scenes,  color  and  size  words  were  helpful  or  not.  Our  results  showed  that  children’s  skills  in  using  language  to  describe  spatial  scenes  were  developing  simultaneously  with  their  spatial  abilities.  We  think  these  results  provide  evidence  that  children’s  attention   to   task-­‐relevant   information   supports   the   development   of   both   spatial   language   and  more  general   spatial   skills.  We  are   currently  designing   a   training   study   to   test  whether  helping  kids  learn  what  to  pay  attention  to  will  lead  to  improvements  in  both  spatial  skills  and  language.      

What  Makes  a  Camel  a  Camel?  When  Children  Learn  General  Versus  Specific  Features  (Lead  Researcher:  Clint  Jensen)    

Children  learn  many  different  concepts  during  early  childhood,  some  of  which  are  general  (like  “animal”)  and  some  of  which  are   specific   (like   “camel”).   Some   of   these   concepts   have   uniquely   identifying   characteristics,   like   the   hump   on   a   camel.  Research  on  aging  and  dementia  shows  that  adults  lose  specific  information  from  concepts  before  general  information—they  may  forget  that  a  camel  should  have  a  hump,  but  they  will  remember  that  it  should  have  four  legs.  We  are  currently  studying  whether  children  learn  first  the  concepts  that  are  lost  later  in  aging,  that  is,  do  they  learn  general  features  first?  If  so,  this  may  explain  why  those  features  persist  longer  in  aging.  We  have  tested  this  by  showing  children  pairs  of  animals  with  or  without  

characteristic  features  of  certain  concepts,  like  a  camel  with  a  hump  versus  a  camel  without  a  hump,  and  as  a  comparison,  a  donkey  with  a  flat  back  versus  a  donkey  with  a  hump.  We  asked  children   to   choose   which   animal   was   real   and   which   was   ‘silly’,   and   then   we   compared  whether  their  choices  were  more  accurate  for  general  or  specific  features.  Our  results  showed  that  3-­‐year-­‐olds  make  the  same  kinds  of  errors  as  the  elderly,  that  is,  they  recalled  the  general  information  better   than   the   specific   information;   by   5   years  old,   however,   children   recall   all  information  equally  well.  These  results  can  help  us  understand  how  features  are  learned  over  time,   and   may   provide   insights   into   re-­‐teaching   information   that   was   lost   to   those   with  memory  impairments.    

Hello  and  Thank  You  from  the  Social  Kids  and  SPACE  Labs!    

Dear  Parents,  Friends,  and  Teachers,  

We’ve  been  busy  since  our  last  newsletter!  Thank  you  for  all  of  your  help  and  support!  Without  families  and  schools  like  yours,  we  would  not  be   able   to  conduct  our   research.  This  newsletter  summarizes   findings   from   studies  we   conducted  over   the  past   year   and  previews  some  ideas  for  future  research  in  our  labs.  If  you  have  any  questions  as  you  read,  please  feel  free  to  contact  us  for  more  information!  

Best  wishes,  Kristin  Shutts,  Director  of  the  Social  Kids  Lab  &  Assistant  Professor  of  Psychology  Vanessa  Simmering,  Director  of  the  SPACE  Lab  &  Assistant  Professor  of  Psychology      

Congratulations  to  our  lab  members  on  their  accomplishments!    

Karissa  Propson  and  Talia  Stoehr  were  accepted  to  the  social  work  graduate  program  at  UW-­‐Madison.  Rachel  King  was  awarded  an  Undergraduate  Travel  Award  to  attend  the  SRCD  Biennial  Meeting  in  Spring  2015.  Ashley  Jordan  (Social  Kids  Lab  Manager  from  2013-­‐2015)  was  accepted  to  the  psychology  PhD  program  at  Yale  University.  Maggie  Underwood  was  accepted  to  the  school  psychology  program  at  Michigan  State  University.  Mitch  Markman  was  accepted  to  the  school  psychology  program  at  UW-­‐Madison.  Leah  Schaumberg  was  accepted  to  the  clinical  mental  health  program  at  Marquette  University.    Emily  Cierzan  was  accepted  to  the  mental  health  counseling  program  at  the  University  of  Cincinnati.    

A  look  at  SPACE  Lab  studies…  

Children’s  Social  Inferences  in  the  Food  Domain  (Lead  Researcher:  Ashley  Jordan)    

Young  children  face  the  enormous  task  of  learning  about  people  and  their  social  relationships  –  for  example,  they  must  discern  whether  two  people  are  friends,  family  members,  or  strangers.  In  one  line  of  work  in  the  lab,  we  are  studying  whether  children  might  use  other  people’s  food  preferences  and  behaviors  to  infer  the  nature  of  their  relationships.    

In   our   first   study,   3-­‐   to   6-­‐year-­‐old   children   watched   animated  characters   interact   with   foods.   The   characters   either   agreed   or  disagreed   on   three   different   things:   (1)   what   their   favorite   food  was,  (2)  what  their  least  favorite  food  was,  or  (3)  exactly  how  they  ate   their   food.   After   learning   this   information   about   a   pair   of  characters,  we  asked  children  to  use  a  four-­‐point  scale  to   indicate  how  socially  close  the  two  people  were.  The  endpoints  on  the  scale  were  “strangers”  and  “best  friends”.    We  found  that  children  rated  people  who  liked  or  disliked  the  same  food   as   being   closer   to   one   another   than   people   who   disagreed  about  their  likes  and  dislikes.  Further,  we  found  that  children  rated  others  as  being  closer  when  they  performed  the  same  motion  with  a  food  prior  to  eating  it.    We   are   extending   this   line   of   work   on   relationship   closeness   by  

asking  children  to  indicate  what  type  of  relationship  the  characters  have.  For  example,  we  are  now  asking  if  the  characters  are  strangers,  schoolmates,  friends,  or  siblings.  We  are  also  testing  whether  children  give  the  same  responses  when  the  characters  talk  about  or   interact  with  artifacts  rather  than  foods.  We  hope  this  research  will  shed   light  both  on  how  young  children   learn  about  social  relationships,  as  well  as  how  young  children  come  to  think  about  food  and  culture.      

Interventions  to  Address  Social  Biases  (Lead  Researcher:  Maggie  Renno)    

Numerous  studies  in  our  lab  indicate  that  children  use  information  about  social  categories  –  for  example,  other  people’s  gender  and  race  –  to  guide  their  friendship  preferences.  In  two  current  lines  of  research,  we  are  investigating  whether  it   is  possible  to  change  children’s  preferences  for,  and  behaviors  toward,  others  who  appear  to  be  different  from  them.    In  one   line  of   research,  we   tested  whether   receiving  help   from   racial   outgroup  members   in   the   context  of   a   computer   game  would   change   children’s   racial   attitudes.   Our   findings   indicate   that  receiving  help  from  racial  outgroup  members  does  improve  children’s  attitudes   toward   those  helpful   individuals,   as  well   as  new   individuals  that  share  the  racial  category  membership  of  those  helpers.        In   a   second   line   of   research,   we   were   interested   in   understanding  ways   to   reduce   gender-­‐based   social   exclusion   in   young   children.  Numerous  studies  (including  ones   in  our   lab)  have  shown  that  young  children  tend  to  include  children  who  match  their  own  gender  in  play  activities,  and  tend  to  exclude  children  who  do  not.  In  our  intervention  study,   we   asked   participants   to   reflect   on   the   emotional  consequences   of   social   exclusion   by   rating   the   feelings   of   children  whom   they   had   excluded   from   an   activity.   The   experience   of  reflecting   on   others’   emotions   prompted   participants   to   be   more  inclusive   of   children   who   did   not   match   their   own   gender   in   future  activities.      These   studies   –   as  well   as   others   in   our   lab   –   help   us   understand  ways   to   inspire   children   to   be  more   open   to   people   from  different  backgrounds!    

A  look  at  Social  Kids  Lab  studies…  

"Who  would  you  like  to  bring  with  you  to  the  zoo?"  

“How  close  do  you  think  they  are?”  

Infant  and  Toddler  Social  Preferences  (Lead  Researcher:  Maggie  Renno)    

People  exhibit  a  variety  of  cues  to  indicate  their  interest  in  social  interaction  and  affiliation.  Common  social  engagement  signals  include  looking  someone  in  the  eye  and  showing  positive  facial  expressions.  In  the  present  research,  we  asked  whether  infants  actively  select  their  social  partners  on  the  basis  of  information  about  gaze  (direct  vs.  averted)  and  emotional  expression  (positive  vs.  neutral).        In  these  studies,  infants  sat  on  a  parent’s  lap  in  front  of  two  touchscreen  computer  monitors.  After  learning  how  to  activate  the  monitors,  infants  were  given  the  opportunity  to  choose  between  images  of  two  adults.  Infants  selected  the  monitor  featuring  the  smiling  adult  with  direct  gaze  more  often  than  the  monitor  featuring  the  adult  with  neutral  expression  and  averted  gaze.        In  ongoing  studies,  we  are  using  the  same  touchscreen  method  to  ask  questions  about  the  social  preferences  of  both  infants  and  toddlers.  In  these  studies,  we  introduce  participants  to  the  same  touchscreen  monitors.  However,  participants  in  our  new  studies  choose  between  a  boy  and  a  girl  on  each  trial.  While  other  studies  in  our  lab  indicate  that  preschool-­‐age  children  show  same-­‐gender  preferences,  this  new  study  with  infants  and  toddlers  will  help  us  to  understand  the  earlier  origins  and  emergence  of  gender  preferences.  

 Learning  from  Social  Cues  in  Classroom  Settings  (Lead  Researcher:  Libbie  Brey)    

Schools  provide  contexts  for  children  to  learn  about  more  than  just  the  content  of  their  teachers’  lessons.  In  particular,  when  teachers  instruct  students  about  topics  like  math  and  reading,  they  also  provide  students  with  information  about  how  well  children  are  doing  in  these  subjects.  Previous  research  suggests  that  children  pay  close  attention  to  information  teachers  convey  about  their  own  academic  abilities.  However,  less  is  known  about  whether  children  pay  attention  to  information  teachers  convey  about  other  students’  abilities.      One  set  of  ongoing  studies  in  our  lab  is  focused  on  whether  children  tune  in  to  adults’  behaviors  in  order  to  make  inferences  about  their  peers.  In  our  first  study,  children  (4-­‐8  years  of  age)  watched  videos  in  which  a  teacher  interacted  with  two  students  who  both  behaved  identically.  In  some  videos,  the  teacher  provided  direct  feedback  (e.g.,  “You  tried  hard  and  did  a  good  job”  or  “You  need  to  try  harder  because  you  did  not  do  well”),  and  in  others  she  demonstrated  different  body  language  to  the  two  students  while  they  read  from  a  book  (e.g.,  smiling  at  one  student  and  looking  at  the  other  student  with  a  neutral  face).  After  each  video,  children  indicated  which  of  the  two  students  they  thought  was  smarter.  We  found  that  children  as  young  as  5  years  of  age  indicated  that  they  thought  the  student  who  received  direct  positive  feedback  or  indirect  positive  body  language  was  smarter.    We  are  just  beginning  this  line  of  research  and  have  many  future  studies  planned.  We  hope  that  our  research  will  contribute  to  our  understanding  of  the  many  ways  children  learn  about  other  people  in  their  social  world.    

Power  and  Body  Language  (Lead  Researcher:  Rachel  King)    Body  language  reveals  a  lot  about  a  person,  and  several  prior  studies  in  our  lab  suggest  that  children  as  young  as  5  years  of  age  are  able  to  use  body  language  to  figure  out  who  holds  more  power  in  social  interactions.  In  previous  studies,  we  showed  children  videos  and  photos  of  real  people  where  one  person  displayed  body  language  cues  associated  with  people  who  are  high  in  power  (for  example,  shoulders  back  and  direct  eye  gaze),  while  another  person  displayed  body  language  cues  associated  with  people  who  have  less  power  (for  example,  shoulders  slouched  and  averted  eye  gaze).  Older  children  (5  to  6  years  of  age)  were  very  accurate  at  guessing  who  was  “in  charge”  in  these  videos  and  photos,  but  younger  children  (3-­‐  and  4  year-­‐olds)  had  some  difficulty.    In  a  follow-­‐up  study,  we  investigated  whether  younger  children  might  be  able  to  use  body  language  to  guess  who  was  “in  charge”  if  we  helped  them  focus  on  the  relevant  information.  To  do  this,  we  showed  children  the  same  photos  from  our  first  study.  This  time,  however,  we  drew  their  attention  to  the  relevant  pieces  of  information.  For  example,  in  the  photo  where  the  people’s  shoulder  positions  were  different,  children  were  asked  to  look  specifically  at  each  person’s  shoulders,  and  we  highlighted  each  person’s  shoulders  with  a  red  circle.    When  we  directed  their  attention  to  the  relevant  body  language  cues,  4-­‐year-­‐old  children  were  quite  accurate  at  guessing  who  was  in  charge.  However,  3-­‐year-­‐olds  still  found  the  task  hard.  These  findings  show  that  children  as  young  as  4  years  of  age  are  capable  of  using  subtle  body  language  information  to  figure  out  the  nature  of  people’s  relationships.  However,  their  use  of  such  information  is  more  robust  and  spontaneous  later  in  development.  

“You  tried  hard  and  did  a  good  job!”