Home > Research > Publications & Outputs > Intentions vs. resemblance
View graph of relations

Intentions vs. resemblance: understanding pictures in typical development and autism

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Published

Standard

Intentions vs. resemblance: understanding pictures in typical development and autism. / Hartley, Calum; Allen, Melissa.
In: Cognition, Vol. 131, No. 1, 04.2014, p. 44-59.

Research output: Contribution to Journal/MagazineJournal articlepeer-review

Harvard

APA

Vancouver

Hartley C, Allen M. Intentions vs. resemblance: understanding pictures in typical development and autism. Cognition. 2014 Apr;131(1):44-59. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.009

Author

Bibtex

@article{f8f10687d1af4c49a460af7989c1530d,
title = "Intentions vs. resemblance: understanding pictures in typical development and autism",
abstract = "Research has debated whether children reflect on artists{\textquoteright} intentions when comprehending pictures, or instead derive meaning entirely from resemblance. We explore these hypotheses by comparing how typically developing toddlers and low-functioning children with autism (a population impaired in intentional reasoning) interpret abstract pictures. In Experiment 1, both groups mapped familiar object names onto abstract pictures, however, they related the same representations to different 3-D referents. Toddlers linked abstract pictures with intended referents they did not resemble, while children with autism mapped picture-referent relations based on resemblance. Experiment 2 showed that toddlers do not rely upon linguistic cues to determine intended referential relations. Experiment 3 confirmed that the responding of children with autism was not due to perseveration or associative word learning, and also provided independent evidence of their intention-reading difficulties. We argue that typically developing children derive meaning from the social-communicative intentions underlying pictures when resemblance is an inadequate cue to meaning. By contrast, children with autism do not reflect on artists{\textquoteright} intentions and simply relate pictures to whatever they happen to resemble.",
keywords = "Understanding pictures, Intentions , Resemblance , Typical development , Autism",
author = "Calum Hartley and Melissa Allen",
year = "2014",
month = apr,
doi = "10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.009",
language = "English",
volume = "131",
pages = "44--59",
journal = "Cognition",
issn = "0010-0277",
publisher = "Elsevier",
number = "1",

}

RIS

TY - JOUR

T1 - Intentions vs. resemblance

T2 - understanding pictures in typical development and autism

AU - Hartley, Calum

AU - Allen, Melissa

PY - 2014/4

Y1 - 2014/4

N2 - Research has debated whether children reflect on artists’ intentions when comprehending pictures, or instead derive meaning entirely from resemblance. We explore these hypotheses by comparing how typically developing toddlers and low-functioning children with autism (a population impaired in intentional reasoning) interpret abstract pictures. In Experiment 1, both groups mapped familiar object names onto abstract pictures, however, they related the same representations to different 3-D referents. Toddlers linked abstract pictures with intended referents they did not resemble, while children with autism mapped picture-referent relations based on resemblance. Experiment 2 showed that toddlers do not rely upon linguistic cues to determine intended referential relations. Experiment 3 confirmed that the responding of children with autism was not due to perseveration or associative word learning, and also provided independent evidence of their intention-reading difficulties. We argue that typically developing children derive meaning from the social-communicative intentions underlying pictures when resemblance is an inadequate cue to meaning. By contrast, children with autism do not reflect on artists’ intentions and simply relate pictures to whatever they happen to resemble.

AB - Research has debated whether children reflect on artists’ intentions when comprehending pictures, or instead derive meaning entirely from resemblance. We explore these hypotheses by comparing how typically developing toddlers and low-functioning children with autism (a population impaired in intentional reasoning) interpret abstract pictures. In Experiment 1, both groups mapped familiar object names onto abstract pictures, however, they related the same representations to different 3-D referents. Toddlers linked abstract pictures with intended referents they did not resemble, while children with autism mapped picture-referent relations based on resemblance. Experiment 2 showed that toddlers do not rely upon linguistic cues to determine intended referential relations. Experiment 3 confirmed that the responding of children with autism was not due to perseveration or associative word learning, and also provided independent evidence of their intention-reading difficulties. We argue that typically developing children derive meaning from the social-communicative intentions underlying pictures when resemblance is an inadequate cue to meaning. By contrast, children with autism do not reflect on artists’ intentions and simply relate pictures to whatever they happen to resemble.

KW - Understanding pictures

KW - Intentions

KW - Resemblance

KW - Typical development

KW - Autism

U2 - 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.009

DO - 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.12.009

M3 - Journal article

VL - 131

SP - 44

EP - 59

JO - Cognition

JF - Cognition

SN - 0010-0277

IS - 1

ER -