Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Children's picture interpretation

Electronic data

  • Revision3

    Rights statement: This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.

    Accepted author manuscript, 1.85 MB, Word document

    Available under license: CC BY: Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

Links

Text available via DOI:

View graph of relations

Children's picture interpretation: appearance or intention?

Research output: Contribution to journalJournal article

Published
<mark>Journal publication date</mark>09/2015
<mark>Journal</mark>Developmental Psychology
Issue number9
Volume51
Number of pages15
Pages (from-to)1201-1215
Publication statusPublished
Original languageEnglish

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.

Bibliographic note

This article may not exactly replicate the final version published in the APA journal. It is not the copy of record.