Baby lip reading

It’s a good thing that the movie Inglourious Basterds has subtitles, because everyone except the Americans are always switching languages. Now imagine that you see a silent clip from the movie — do you think you’d be able to tell when someone starts speaking a different language? If you’ve ever tried figuring out what someone is saying just from looking at their mouth, you’ll know it’s not easy. What if you showed Inglourious Bastards to a baby — would it be able to detect a language switch if the sound were turned off? Since babies often seem more like blobs than humans, you might think not. Amazingly, we’ve recently discovered that 8 month-old infants CAN tell the difference — but only if they’re bilingual.

How can babies, who can’t even understand what their parents are saying, tell when a silent face switches languages? And how can you test a baby to figure this out? Whitney Weikum and her colleagues had babies sit on a parent’s lap and watch silent videos clips of 3 different women reading children’s stories. Babies saw lots of similar video clips all in the same language (English) until they stopped looking at them as much. Just like when you look away from something when you’re bored with it, so will babies.

Suddenly, the language in the videos switched: although the same 3 women were reading stories in silent videos, now they were reading them in a different language. Now French-English bilingual babies returned to looking at the videos. They noticed that the language changed, and became interested in the videos again. Since the videos were silent, the only clues they could have used were the way the women’s faces and mouths moved. So babies who can’t even talk were using these very subtle differences to tell languages apart.

Not all babies were equally good at this test, though: monolingual English-speaking 8 month-olds couldn’t tell the difference when the languages switched. But when monolingual babies were younger (4-6 months old), they could. Why is this? It seems like all babies start out with the ability to tell languages apart just from looking at people’s faces when they’re speaking. But since this skill is only really helpful for babies exposed to more than one language on a regular basis, bilingual babies use it and monolinguals loose it.

Rather than being confused by constantly switching languages at home, bilingual babies are actually quite good at telling them apart — even just from tiny differences in people’s facial expressions. When it comes to language learning, babies are very intelligent blobs.

ResearchBlogging.org

Weikum, W., Vouloumanos, A., Navarra, J., Soto-Faraco, S., Sebastian-Galles, N., & Werker, J. (2007). Visual Language Discrimination in Infancy Science, 316 (5828), 1159-1159 DOI: 10.1126/science.1137686

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

The Happiness Disease

I bet you’ve had at least one friend or coworker who never stays at home when they’re sick.  The kind who will sit next to you and cough, sneeze, and hack their way through meetings, while you and everyone around them edge slowly away or glance around furtively in search of Purel.  It’s not that you don’t like that person, but you understand that being in contact with germs will turn you into the next coughing sneezer who people will avoid like…..well, the plague.

But what if I told you that colds aren’t the only thing you can catch from your neighbor?   Continue reading

Posted in Clinical Psychology, Social Psychology | 5 Comments

Ingroups, Identities, and In-Memoriams: Why We Must Remember Never To Forget

People around the world are still figuring out the right way to react to the news of Osama Bin Laden’s death last night – May 1, 2011.

This is not the only significant historical event to happen on May 1. Exactly eight years ago, Bush gave his now-infamous “Mission Accomplished” speech. Sixty-six years ago, Hitler’s April 30th suicide was announced and publicized. And, of course, we are mere months away from the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

But today is significant for another reason: It is the Jewish commemorative holiday Yom HaZikaron laShoah ve-laG’vurah, or Yom HaShoah. Known in English as Holocaust Remembrance Day. Continue reading

Posted in Social Psychology | 1 Comment

Where do our relationship expectations come from?

Imagine you’re walking through the mall and see a mom with her son. As you get closer to them, you notice that the little boy is upset and crying. How would you expect the mom to respond to her crying child? Should she ignore his crying, walk off, and expect the child to hush up and follow? Or should she pick him up and try to soothe his cries? Many of us have clear expectations for how we think the mom should respond and may be surprised if the mom doesn’t respond the way we expected her to. But where do these expectations come from?

Continue reading

Posted in Cognitive Psychology, Developmental Psychology | Leave a comment

I Liked The Royal Wedding (And It’s OK If You Did Too)

 

It’s official. As of Friday morning, England has a new future queen – Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge. Formerly known as Kate Middleton.

 

In the weeks leading up to the Royal Wedding, there seemed to be a lot of outrage. Most notably, I saw a lot of discussions revolving around the questionable morality of celebrating an institution that openly reveres inherited privilege and power.

That last critique really made me reflect – and honestly, feel a bit ashamed. It’s a very good point, and not one that I want to dismiss lightly. I was genuinely interested in following the events surrounding the Royal Wedding, but I really don’t like to think that I was celebrating institutionalized classism.

So with that criticism in mind, I’d like to revisit the idea of “inherited power.” What is it that today’s British monarchs are actually passing along to their successors? Can we really call it power? Continue reading

Posted in Social Psychology | 7 Comments

Did the disappearance of pirates cause global warming? Probably not…

A 2007 study showed that people who are depressed eat more chocolate.  Does this mean that eating chocolate causes depression?  Of course not.  One of the first lessons young scientists learn is that correlation does not equal causation.  Why not?  For one, the opposite might be true – depression could lead people to eat more chocolate.  It’s also possible that there is some factor that influences both chocolate consumption and depression that could explain why they’re correlated – for example, hormonal changes might lead to chocolate cravings and moodiness.  A popular joke about the correlation-causation issue comes from the observation that as the number of pirates in the world has decreased over the past century, the average temperature has increased – clearly global warming didn’t result from the decline in piracy.

Continue reading

Posted in Clinical Psychology, Personality Psychology, Quantitative Psychology | 1 Comment

Monkey talk: a powerful baby-teaching tool

What do you see in this picture?

Now ask yourself: What do you know about this creature?

 

You probably came up with at least a couple facts: it’s a kind of reptile, it’s huge, it went extinct millions of years ago. And you’re right, because this is the newly discovered dinosaur “Brontomerus” (apparently, it had frighteningly powerful thighs). Unless you follow this kind of archaeology news, you probably hadn’t ever seen this creature before — and yet you were able to figure out some of its properties. Because you recognized the picture as belonging to the group or “category” of dinosaurs, you could use your knowledge of dinosaurs in general to predict things about the one in the picture. Using categories like this, to make intelligent guesses about something new, is crucial to human survival. (If you see a huge cat that kind of looks like a lion, you know not to get too close to it). How do we form these kinds of categories in the first place?

We seem to have this evolutionarily adaptive grouping skill very early in life. If you show 4 month-old babies lots of cat pictures, and then show them a picture of a dog, they will look at the dog for a long time — longer than they would look at a new cat picture (Quinn, Eimas & Rosenkrantz, 1993). Babies pick up on the similarity between all the cats they’ve seen, so when they suddenly see a dog, it’s is more different and interesting to look at than another cat.

A fascinating twist to this story is that babies are much better at noticing these kinds of categories when they hear language. A recent experiment by Ferry, Hespos and Waxman showed 4 month-olds pictures of dinosaurs. Half of the babies heard someone call the dinosaur by a made-up name (“Look at the toma. Do you see the toma?”). After seeing just 8 dinosaurs, these babies looked longer at a picture of a fish than at a picture of a new dinosaur. But if babies heard beeping instead of human language while seeing the dinosaur pictures, they didn’t look longer at the fish, as if they didn’t notice the similarity between all the dinosaurs they had just seen. Only the babies that heard language were able to pick up on the dinosaur category.

Why does this happen? When a person uses a new word like “toma” while showing a bunch of pictures, this suggests that they’re referring to a new category in those pictures. But if you’ve spent any time around a 4 month-old, you should be scratching your head right now. Babies this young don’t seem to understand language at all. They don’t even realize that “Look” and “toma” are separate words, much less realize that “toma” is a new word and could be referring to the category “dinosaur”. In fact, it seems like hearing anything that sounds like language will get very small babies to notice categories better — it doesn’t even have to be human language. Recent experiments similar to the one with dinosaurs find that babies who hear monkey calls are also better at picking up on categories. It’s as though any human-like noise sends a signal to very little babies to “pay attention!” — and specifically, to pay attention in a way that makes them notice how things can be grouped together in meaningful ways.

Why and how this happens in such young children is still a big mystery in psychology. But at least now we know that it doesn’t really matter what we say to our babies. If you feel silly enough to hoot like a monkey, no worries — your baby will still be learning something.

 

Ferry, A., Hespos, S., & Waxman, S. (2010, November). Tuning the Link Between Words and Categories: Primate Vocalizations Facilitate Object Categorization in 3-Month-Old, But Not 12-Month-Old Infants. Poster presented at Boston University Child Language Development Conference, Boston, MA.

 

 

 

ResearchBlogging.org
Ferry, A., Hespos, S., & Waxman, S. (2010). Categorization in 3- and 4-Month-Old Infants: An Advantage of Words Over Tones Child Development, 81 (2), 472-479 DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01408.x

ResearchBlogging.org
Quinn, P., Eimas, P., & Rosenkrantz, S. (1993). Evidence for representations of perceptually similar natural categories by 3-month-old and 4-month-old infants Perception, 22 (4), 463-475 DOI: 10.1068/p220463

Posted in Uncategorized | 1 Comment

How Young is Too Young and Why: Problems with popular understanding of teen pregnancy

From an evolutionary perspective women reach their reproductive prime between the ages of 15 and 24. Many societies support women becoming mothers during mid to late teen years. Yet most people in the United States would argue that 15 is too young for a young woman to become a mother. But why is having a child within this specific timeframe considered problematic? Policy makers, economists and the general public use several arguments to support anti-teen motherhood policies. Most of these arguments have significant flaws and miss the underlying problem affecting young women vulnerable to becoming teen mothers in the United States today. Continue reading

Posted in Community Psychology | 2 Comments

Not so Black and White: Understanding trust between therapists and clients of different racial and ethnic backgrounds

Ever wonder what makes someone disclose the intimate details of their life to a relative stranger… and feel comfortable doing so? If you are a therapist, or an individual who one day might work with a clinical social worker, psychologist or family therapist you should care. A host of evidence demonstrates that the perceived level of trust and empathy a therapist has towards clients directly impacts whether clients drop out of therapy, disclose information relevant to treatment, and report a high level of satisfaction with treatment. This relationship is referred to as the therapeutic alliance. Challenges exist to establish a strong therapeutic alliance with any client. The obstacles only increase when a White therapist works with a client of color. If therapists receive the same training and utilize the same skills to establish empathy and trust with all clients, why do differences exist in the therapeutic alliance between racial and ethnic groups? Even more important, how do we address this differential? Continue reading

Posted in Clinical Psychology, Community Psychology | Leave a comment

Memory distortions: Not just for long-term memories

Consider the following list of words:

Spring
Egg
Basket
Jellybean
April
Hunt
Ham
Sunday
Chocolate
Peeps
Bonnet

If you had to memorize this list for a test, you’d actually do a pretty good job.  Why?  Well, you wouldn’t have to remember each word individually—you could just remember the overall gist of Easter.  Simply remembering the gist would help you generate the words since you’d already know that the words go together.

We often remember things by relying on the overall gist of an event—for example, instead of storing every detail about our last birthday, we tend to remember abstract things like “I had a fun party” or “I was in a grumpy mood because I felt old.”  This strategy allows us to remember more things about an event, but there’s one major drawback: by storing memories based on gist, we actually change how we remember the event.  This happens because we are biased to remember things that are consistent with our overall summary of the event.  So if we remember the birthday party was “super fun” overall, we’ll exaggerate how we remember the details—the average chocolate cake is now “insanely good”, and the 10 friends who were there becomes a “huge crowd.”  One of the factors that could contribute to this distortion is time; as you forget the details of an event, there’s more room for gist to change how you remember things.  But you would remember the details of an event immediately afterward, right?

Continue reading

Posted in Cognitive Psychology, Sensation & Perception | 1 Comment