↓ Skip to main content

Explanation-based learning in infancy

Overview of attention for article published in Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, July 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
63 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
37 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Explanation-based learning in infancy
Published in
Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, July 2017
DOI 10.3758/s13423-017-1334-4
Pubmed ID
Authors

Renée Baillargeon, Gerald F. DeJong

Abstract

In explanation-based learning (EBL), domain knowledge is leveraged in order to learn general rules from few examples. An explanation is constructed for initial exemplars and is then generalized into a candidate rule that uses only the relevant features specified in the explanation; if the rule proves accurate for a few additional exemplars, it is adopted. EBL is thus highly efficient because it combines both analytic and empirical evidence. EBL has been proposed as one of the mechanisms that help infants acquire and revise their physical rules. To evaluate this proposal, 11- and 12-month-olds (n = 260) were taught to replace their current support rule (that an object is stable when half or more of its bottom surface is supported) with a more sophisticated rule (that an object is stable when half or more of the entire object is supported). Infants saw teaching events in which asymmetrical objects were placed on a base, followed by static test displays involving a novel asymmetrical object and a novel base. When the teaching events were designed to facilitate EBL, infants learned the new rule with as few as two (12-month-olds) or three (11-month-olds) exemplars. When the teaching events were designed to impede EBL, however, infants failed to learn the rule. Together, these results demonstrate that even infants, with their limited knowledge about the world, benefit from the knowledge-based approach of EBL.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 37 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 37 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 10 27%
Student > Master 6 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 14%
Professor 2 5%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 5%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 8 22%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 14 38%
Computer Science 3 8%
Neuroscience 3 8%
Philosophy 2 5%
Mathematics 1 3%
Other 4 11%
Unknown 10 27%