title: Hands in the air: using ungrounded iconic gestures to teach children conservation of quantity.
abstract: Including gesture in instruction facilitates learning. Why? One possibility is that gesture points out objects in the immediate context and thus helps ground the words learners hear in the world they see. Previous work on gesture's role in instruction has used gestures that either point to or trace paths on objects, thus providing support for this hypothesis. The experiments described here investigated the possibility that gesture helps children learn even when it is not produced in relation to an object but is instead produced "in the air." Children were given instruction in Piagetian conservation problems with or without gesture and with or without concrete objects. The results indicate that children given instruction with speech and gesture learned more about conservation than children given instruction with speech alone, whether or not objects were present during instruction. Gesture in instruction can thus help learners learn even when those gestures do not direct attention to visible objects, suggesting that gesture can do more for learners than simply ground arbitrary, symbolic language in the physical, observable world.
authors.affiliation: Department of Psychology, University of Chicago, Chicago, IL 60637, USA. rping@uchicago.edu
authors.forename: Raedy M
authors.initials: RM
authors.lastname: Ping
authors.forename: Susan
authors.initials: S
authors.lastname: Goldin-Meadow
mesh_terms: D002648:Child; D002675:Child, Preschool; D032882:Comprehension; D005260:Female; D005556:Form Perception; D005868:Gestures; D006801:Humans; D007092:Imagination; D007600:Judgment; D007858:Learning; D008297:Male; D011939:Mental Recall; D009949:Orientation; D011340:Problem Solving; D012858:Size Perception; D013067:Speech Perception; D013663:Teaching / Q000379:methods*
references.citation: Child Dev. 1984 Jun;55(3):772-81
references.pmid: 6734317
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2002 Mar;131(1):5-15
references.pmid: 11900103
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2004 Nov;40(6):1059-1067
references.pmid: 15535756
references.citation: Cognition. 1986 Jun;23(1):43-71
references.pmid: 3742990
references.citation: Psychol Res. 2001 Nov;65(4):235-41
references.pmid: 11789427
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2001 Nov;12(6):516-22
references.pmid: 11760141
references.citation: Science. 2007 May 25;316(5828):1128-9
references.pmid: 17525320
references.citation: J Exp Psychol Gen. 2007 Nov;136(4):539-50
references.pmid: 17999569
references.citation: Psychol Sci. 2005 Feb;16(2):85-9
references.pmid: 15686572
references.citation: J Child Lang. 2001 Jun;28(2):325-49
references.pmid: 11449942
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 2003 Jun;46(4):414-66
references.pmid: 12809681
references.citation: J Child Lang. 1992 Oct;19(3):559-80
references.pmid: 1429948
references.citation: Dev Psychol. 2003 May;39(3):509-20
references.pmid: 12760519
references.citation: Cogn Psychol. 1993 Oct;25(4):468-523
references.pmid: 8243044
references.citation: Cognition. 2008 Feb;106(2):1047-58
references.pmid: 17560971
references.citation: Psychol Rev. 1993 Apr;100(2):279-97
references.pmid: 8483984