Phys Ther. 2013 Jan; 93(1): 94103.

PMCID: PMC3538987
Published online 2012 Sep 20. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20120158

Grounding Early Intervention: Physical Therapy Cannot Just Be About

Motor Skills Anymore
Michele A. Lobo, Regina T. Harbourne, Stacey C. Dusing, Sarah Westcott McCoy
M.A. Lobo, PT, PhD, Physical Therapy Department, 329 McKinly Building, University of Delaware, Newark, DE 19716 (USA).
R.T. Harbourne, PT, PhD, PCS, Munroe Meyer Institute, University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska.
S.C. Dusing, PT, PhD, Department of Physical Therapy, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
S.W. McCoy, PT, PhD, Program in Physical Therapy, Department of Rehabilitation Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington.
Corresponding author.
Address all correspondence to Dr Lobo at: Email: malobo@udel.edu.

Received 2012 Apr 2; Accepted 2012 Sep 17.

Copyright 2013 American Physical Therapy Association

Abstract
This perspective article provides support for 4 interrelated tenets: grounded perceptual-motor experience
within cultural and social contexts forms cognition; exploration through early behaviors, such as object
interaction, sitting, and locomotion, broadly facilitates development; infants and children with limited
exploration are at risk for global developmental impairments; and early interventions targeting exploratory
behaviors may be feasible and effective at advancing a range of abilities across developmental domains
and time. These tenets emphasize that through the promotion of early perceptual-motor behaviors, broader,
more global developmental advancements can be facilitated and future delays can be minimized across
domains for infants and children with special needs. Researchers, educators, and clinicians should build on
these tenets to further demonstrate the effectiveness of targeted early interventions. The goals of these
interventions should be not only to advance targeted perceptual-motor skills in the moment but also to
more broadly advance future abilities and meet the early intervention goal of maximizing children's
learning potential.

The purpose of this article is to support the proposition that early intervention focused on key perceptual-
motor behaviors can improve an individual's ability to function and participate in the present moment, as
well as advance his or her future development across domains. First, we define cognition and defend the
idea that cognition is grounded in everyday experiences.1,2 Second, we briefly review the literature on the
effectiveness of early intervention, noting the lack of support for current perceptual-motor interventions.
Third, we use object interaction, sitting, and locomotion as examples to demonstrate that exploration
through early perceptual-motor behaviors significantly affects future ability across developmental
domains,3,4 that infants with limited exploration are at risk for a broad range of impairments,5,6 and that
early intervention programs targeting key exploratory behaviors within social contexts (as opposed to
practicing less variable behaviors in more isolated social situations and environments) may be optimal for
improving a range of abilities across developmental domains and time. We conclude by discussing the
implications of applying a grounded cognition lens to early intervention practice, therapist education, and
research.
Grounded Cognition
What does the term cognition encompass? According to Matlin,7 cognition or mental activity describes
the acquisition, storage, transformation, and use of knowledge. Cognition includes a wide range of mental
processes, such as those involved with perception, action, memory, language, problem solving, reasoning,
decision making, and social interaction. Therefore, when we discuss cognition, we mean not only more
traditional cognitive abilities but also broader perceptual-motor, language, and social abilities.

Depending on the theory of development used, the terms development and learning can represent
different processes. In this article, we use the term development to represent the compilation of
behaviors, abilities, and knowledge already learned and established by an individual. We use the term
learning to represent the compilation of behaviors, abilities, and knowledge presently being acquired by
an individual.

A primary goal of early intervention is to advance cognition and readiness to learn for infants and children
with special needs. Achieving this goal requires an empirically supported model for how these abilities
emerge. In the 20th century, cognition was predominantly viewed as a process occurring independently of
the body, environment, and other people.8 Perceptual information served as input and behavior resulted as
output from a cognitive system that was separate and unaffected by perceptual-motor experience (Fig. 1A).
This view has been challenged recently as proponents of grounded, or embodied, cognition have argued
that perceptual-motor experience plays an integral role in cognition.8,9 In this view, rather than serving
simply as input and output for an independent cognitive structure, perceptual-motor experience within
environmental, social, and cultural contexts actively builds, maintains, and alters cognition (Fig. 1B).2,10
This view revisits ideas proposed more than 2,000 years ago by ancient philosophers and more recently by
Piaget and Vygotsky.1012 Although this concept of grounded cognition is not novel, what is new is that
technology and research methods that allow scientific testing of this concept have been developed over the
past several decades.

The concept of grounded cognition is supported by mounting evidence of the effects of perceptual-motor
experience on processes such as myelination of axons,13 maturation and connectivity of white matter,14
and temporal activation and volume of gray matter.15 The grounded cognition perspective has gained
increasing support in disciplines ranging from philosophy to cognitive psychology, education, and
robotics.2,16,17 Research support over the past decades has demonstrated the influence of perceptual-
motor experience on tasks involving memory, knowledge, language, thought, and social interaction.10,18
The concept of grounded cognition is already embedded in certain theoretical frameworks, including
dynamic systems theory and ecological systems theory.19,20 As empirical support continues to grow for
the concept of grounded cognition and theories that encompass it, it is clear that physical therapy
interventions should be redesigned on the basis of these theories; redesigned interventions should replace
more traditional, less effective interventions based on theories lacking support, such as those based
primarily on maturation, reflex control and inhibition, and more passive experience.21

Early Intervention
Reviews of current early intervention practices do not offer clear guidance to those searching for a model
for best practice. There is evidence that some early intervention programs are effective at advancing long-
term development, although to varying degrees. For instance, some early intervention programs can have
long-lasting effects on outcomes such as school performance,22 psychosocial skills,23 and perceptual-
motor skills.24 For infants born preterm, some interventions provided in the first years of life may advance
cognition, receptive language, visual-motor, and spatial skills at preschool age.25,26 There also are studies
suggesting that other early intervention programs do not result in long-term developmental advancements.
For instance, children who participated in a special literacy program in Head Start before school age did
not have better literacy outcomes in first and second grades than children who received typical Head Start
services.27 A systematic review of the early intervention literature demonstrated that early perceptual-
motor interventions based on the neurodevelopmental treatment approach were not effective at advancing
development, whereas interventions focused on advancing general motor development and enhancing
caregiver-child interactions did advance development.21 Similarly, a recent review of randomized trials of
early intervention for children at high risk found that motor skills were not consistently affected by early
intervention.28

It is clear that there is a gap in the current knowledge about which early interventions facilitate the best
outcomes. The costs of minimal efficacy for early interventions are high both financially and in quality of
life for families receiving services. Therefore, identifying which interventions can reliably improve
perceptual-motor ability, cognition, and readiness to learn is imperative.

Object Interaction, Sitting, and Locomotion as Models for Grounded Cognition

Object interaction, sitting, and locomotion are examples of early perceptual-motor behaviors that allow
infants to explore their environment and to acquire knowledge.9 Here we describe how these behaviors
broadly affect development, thereby serving as models for grounded cognitive theory. Next, we provide
evidence suggesting that delays in each of these behaviors can negatively affect development. Finally, we
suggest potential interventions to improve these behaviors. These interventions are aimed at improving
targeted perceptual-motor function to advance cognition and to prepare children to learn in school.

Object Interaction, Sitting, and Locomotion in Relation to Grounded Cognition

Object interaction, sitting, and locomotor abilities are important because they allow infants to gain
information about the interrelationships among their bodies, objects, and people.3,29 These behaviors are
complex, dynamic, and continually coevolving throughout the first years of life.30 Infants with typical
development begin to perform these behaviors sequentially during the first year of life. Although
developmental trajectories for these behaviors can be variable, we outline here an example of what is
typical.

Object interaction is the ability to hold, manipulate, and explore objects. It begins with grasping at birth
and becomes increasingly more controlled and targeted to object properties throughout the first years of
life.31 Infants with typical development begin to retrieve desired objects at approximately 4 or 5 months of
age by reaching.32 In the months after the onset of reaching, infants are able to maintain a vertical position
as they learn to sit. This upright position allows infants a novel perceptual view of their world, as well as a
new play position on which they can impose their already developing object interaction behaviors. In the
months after the onset of sitting, infants are able to move around their environment, crawling at
approximately 8 months of age and walking at approximately 12 months of age. This freedom of
movement greatly expands opportunities to interact and learn, as infants move to desired objects,
locations, and people who are out of their stationary reach.

Infants' abilities to explore objects and to interact with people through object interaction, sitting, and
locomotion broadly affect their development. The frequency and variety of interactions that infants and
children have with objects teach them about object properties and how to represent or form memories of
objects.33 Object interaction facilitates the ability to segregate or group objects, to recognize objects when
only parts of the objects are in view, and to recognize objects that are familiar.34,35 Object interaction even
teaches infants novel, more sophisticated ways in which they can act upon objects to gain more
36
knowledge.36 For instance, infants who were developing typically and who reached earlier had more
mature object exploration ability in the following months,37 and infants who had experience using hook-
and-loop mittens to help retrieve and explore objects earlier had greater object engagement and more
sophisticated object exploration performance 1 year later.38

Sitting advances cognition by providing infants with an improved ability to process visual
information.39,40 The interaction of postural control during sitting and visual attention in infancy
facilitates future cognitive development because visual attention is a key factor in problem solving.41 The
coordination of improved gaze stabilization and manual skills during sitting is accompanied by increased
possibilities for object interaction and learning.42 For example, sitting allows infants to use their hands
freely to put objects together and take them apart, a behavior that forms the foundation for understanding
important mathematical concepts.43

In the second half of the first year of life, infants demonstrate significant advances in problem solving and
spatial memory in association with locomotor experience. For instance, infants with more locomotor
experience are more successful at spatial problem solving and memory tasks, such as choosing the most
efficient path for reaching a desired goal and finding hidden targets.44,45

Object interaction, sitting, and locomotor behaviors also affect language development and social
interaction. The information that infants gather through object interaction aids in infants' learning to
categorize and discriminate objects, 2 foundational abilities for language development.46,47 Placement of
objects in the mouth during oral exploration leads to use of the vocal tracts in new ways to produce novel
types of vocalizations with unique phonetic characteristics.48 The performance of rhythmical arm
movements (banging) facilitates the emergence of babbling.49 From 9 through 26 months of age, the way
in which infants use objects based on their specific properties for construction play is more strongly
associated with the emergence of words and an increase in vocabulary size than is chronological age.50
Object interaction also affects receptive language abilities. For instance, 20-month-old infants are better
able to learn the names of objects when the objects can be explored using a greater number of actions.51

The ability to explore objects also affects infants' social interactions. For example, while infants spend
more time looking at people than objects before the onset of reaching, they learn to share their attention
between people and objects and to involve objects in their social interactions after the onset of reaching.52
After the onset of reaching, caregivers use objects more in their play with infants, and infants show objects
to others as tools to elicit social interactions.53

The ability to sit also greatly affects language development and social interaction. Sitting upright elicits
physical changes in respiratory and articulatory structures that affect the types of sounds that infants
produce.54 Sitting is associated with a larger number of utterances per breath, a decrease in simple vowel
production, and greater variability of consonant-vowel utterances.55 In addition, sitting upright prompts
the tongue to fall further forward in the vocal tract, enhancing the production of consonant-vowel
utterances.46

The ability to locomote affects how infants communicate and interact.3,56 As infants gain locomotor
experience through crawling, they use more gestures to communicate with others, they demonstrate less
negative affect (crying or fussing), their parents perceive them as more emotionally positive (smiling and
laughing more), and they initiate interactions with others more often during free play.3,56 Compared with
crawling infants, walking infants use even more gestures and vocalizations as they engage in early shared
attention with people and objects.57

Thus, the research strongly suggests that early object interaction, sitting, and locomotor behaviors are
important vehicles for promoting future cognitive, perceptual-motor, language, and social-emotional
development.

Object Interaction, Sitting, and Locomotion in Relation to Grounded Cognition in

Populations at Risk for Developmental Delays
A growing body of literature suggests that for infants and children at risk for and with developmental
delays, object interaction, sitting, and locomotor behaviors play similar key roles in development.
Consequently, delays in the performance of these behaviors would be expected to limit infants' abilities to
gain information about the interrelationships among their bodies, objects, and people.

Delays in the ability to interact with objects have been found to broadly and negatively affect other areas
of development. For example, 4-month-old infants born preterm at high risk required longer time periods
to explore objects before they could recognize them as being familiar and had difficulty identifying other
objects as being different; these infants then had poorer intelligence quotients at 8 years of age.58
Likewise, the amount of focused examination of objects at 7 months of corrected age in infants born
preterm was predictive of hyperactivity or impulsivity problems and cognitive disabilities through 5 years
of age.59 At 9 months of corrected age, infants born preterm at high risk had less sophisticated object
exploration ability, with less fingering, rotating, and transferring of objects between hands, than infants
born full-term or preterm at low risk; this finding was related to poorer cognitive performance at 24
months of age.6

Infants born with Down syndrome had less sophisticated object exploration behavior than infants with
typical development from 6 through 10 months of age.60 At 8 to 16 months of age, infants with Down
syndrome had less object exploration behavior and less coordinated attention with people and objects than
infants with typical development.61 At 22 months of age, infants with Down syndrome had decreased
object engagement, shorter sequences of goal-directed behavior with objects, higher rates of object
rejection, and less pleasure when their actions on objects caused an associated reinforcement compared
with infants with typical development.62

Infants later diagnosed with autism spent less time in functional and symbolic play with objects between 9
and 12 months of age.63,64 At 12 months of age, infants later diagnosed with autism spent more time
spinning, rotating, and performing unusual and persistent visual explorations with objects.65 These
repetitive behaviors with objects at 12 months of age were significantly related to future cognitive
outcomes and severity of symptoms at 36 months of age. Thus, infants and children with a variety of
special needs show delays and differences in their object interaction behaviors that are related to future
cognitive abilities.

Some literature supports the idea that delays in sitting or locomotor abilities broadly and negatively affect
other areas of development. Infants who were born preterm and had abnormal sitting behaviors
(characterized by excessive neck, arm, and trunk extension) during infancy had poorer cognitive and
problem-solving abilities at 18 months of age than did infants who were born preterm but had normal
sitting behaviors during infancy.66 Children who had myelomeningocele monitored from birth through 14
years of age and who attained the ability to walk had significantly higher intelligence quotients than
children who had myelomeningocele at similar neurologic levels and similar brain abnormalities but who
did not attain the ability to walk.67 Early delays in self-locomotion can negatively affect future school
performance and accomplishment of activities of daily living. For instance, delays in higher-level motor
skills such as locomotion were associated with diminished visuospatial abilities, perceptual-motor
cognition, and attention in school-age children who were born preterm,68 and delays in locomotor abilities

69
were associated with poorer future life habits in children with cerebral palsy (CP).69 Thus, the literature
suggests that object interaction, sitting, and locomotion are important early behaviors that facilitate global
development and should be a focus of early intervention.

Potential Interventions to Advance Object Interaction, Sitting, Locomotion, and Grounded

Cognition
Recent studies suggest that interventions can be provided to infants to improve their object interaction,
sitting, and locomotor behaviors and, as a result, to more broadly advance their cognition. For example,
the onset of reaching in infants with typical development can be advanced by encouraging general arm
movements through play involving tethering an infant's arms to an overhead toy that is out of reach yet
moves when the infant's arm moves.70 In addition, reach onset as well as future object exploration and
means-end (cause-effect) learning abilities can be advanced by performing early reaching and object
exploration play with infants.29,37,70 A host of future behaviorsfrom reach onset through object
exploration, sitting, and locomotionin infants with typical development can be advanced through a 3-
week education program for caregivers on how to handle and position their 2-month-old infants.4,37

A recent randomized clinical trial suggests that these same experiences provided for a longer duration are
similarly beneficial for infants born preterm.71 In that trial, infants born preterm were provided with these
intervention experiences from 2 through 4 months of age. The preterm infants in the group receiving the
intervention reached earlier, reached more consistently, and maintained contact with objects to explore
them for longer durations than a control group of preterm infants who did not receive the intervention.71

There may be ways to encourage caregivers of children with autism to interact and play with their children
to promote more advanced object exploration and cognitive development. For instance, a recent study
showed that preschoolers with autism performed increased object exploration with more sustained
attention when their parents used 3 or more cues to encourage them to maintain focus on the object in
play.72 When parents used fewer cues or used cues that redirected children's attention away from the
object of focus, the children were less likely to engage in sustained exploration of the object. The cues that
parents used included bringing the object into contact with the child, vocalizing, moving the object within
the child's view, creating visual or sound effects for the object, and moving their hands within the child's
view.

The literature also suggests that there are ways to improve sitting ability. For example, sitting ability in
infants with typical development can be improved by allowing the infants opportunities to reach for
objects during play while sitting.73 Sitting ability and underlying postural control can be advanced in
infants who are younger than 2 years of age and who have CP or are at risk for CP by providing
interventions that focus on the exploration of one's body, objects, and others and that incorporate
variability, complexity, and the refinement of multiple sitting strategies.74 Such interventions have been
more effective at advancing sitting and postural control abilities than practice during static sitting with
assistive equipment. These findings suggest that the use of adapted seating for infants and children unable
to sit independently should be complemented with frequent opportunities to sit without assistive devices so
that these infants and children can develop the active learning and movement adjustments required to
control sitting, to explore, and to learn.

There is a growing body of literature highlighting some effective ways to advance early locomotor
behaviors. The onset of independent walking in infants with Down syndrome can be advanced, and
walking ability in children born preterm and children with CP can be improved through treadmill walking
practice.75,76 Another interesting and growing area of research aims to provide infants and young children
with the developmental benefits of independent locomotion through child-driven powered-mobility
equipment. Studies have shown that cognitive, social, and language development can be advanced through
powered-mobility interventions for infants and young children with myelomeningocele, CP, and other
developmental disabilities.77,78

Therefore, there is growing support for the premise that object interaction, sitting, and locomotor
behaviors can be advanced in infants and children with or at risk for disabilities if the appropriate
interventions are used. Such interventions are characterized by their focus on exploration, active trial and
error hypothesis testing, variability of practice, high frequency of practice, and caregiver education and
involvement.71,74,79 Building skills that are valuable to the child and family can broadly support
development and improve learning.

Conclusions and Clinical Implications

In this perspective article we supported the proposal that early intervention providers should view
perceptual-motor behaviors not only as means to improve function and participation in the present moment
but also as vehicles to broadly facilitate future development across domains and to advance readiness to
learn in school (Fig. 2). We supported this view by highlighting evidence demonstrating that cognition is
grounded in perceptual-motor experiences within social and cultural contexts. We presented object
interaction, sitting, and locomotion as models to demonstrate that early perceptual-motor behaviors can
broadly affect development. We provided evidence that delays in these behaviors often are present and are
related to future broader delays in infants and children with a variety of diagnoses. Finally, we provided
examples from the literature of how the development of these early behaviors can be effectively advanced
to increase participation and to address the primary goal of early intervention to promote readiness to
learn. Understanding the concept of grounded cognition and its supporting evidence is important because it
can allow physical therapists and other early intervention providers to focus on minimizing future delays
before they happen; to target their interventions at behaviors that are foundational in development; and to
reaffirm the significance of physical therapy in early intervention, where the focus is on preparing children
to be ready to learn in school.

We propose that the concept of grounded cognition should be actively incorporated into physical therapist
practice, education, and research (Table). In pediatric clinical practice, physical therapists should be aware
of the impact of perceptual-motor experience on other aspects of development and learning. They should
account for this in determining whether a child requires physical therapy services and how those services
should be provided. For instance, the concept of grounded cognition reinforces the idea that it is not
sufficient to assess whether a child can perform a behavior in isolation; it must be determined how the
child uses this behavior to explore objects, people, and events in social situations because these are the
processes through which learning and participation occur.1 Goal setting should reflect the link between
perceptual-motor experience and grounded cognition. Thus, instead of a goal being The child will sit
independently for 1 minute, the goal could be The child will use sitting posture to explore objects during
group play on the floor with peers for 1 minute.

Physical therapists also should advocate for the role of active experience in learning and development by
educating other team members, including families, teachers, speech therapists, occupational therapists, and
other physical therapists, who may not be aware of the broad role that perceptual-motor experience plays
in development. Recent studies have linked interventions focused on education, family involvement, and
active performance of variable, appropriately challenging tasks with more positive future developmental
outcomes.80 Because physical therapists have expert knowledge regarding perceptual-motor behaviors,
educating government agencies and insurance companies that approve funding for services about the
empirical support for grounded development can help justify the need for physical therapy services for
infants and children with special needs. To meet these goals, pediatric clinicians need to be uniquely
qualified to assess and intervene across traditional domains. They also need to be able to translate
scientific information to a host of peoplefrom children to legislatorsacross a variety of settingsfrom
the playground to legislative buildings.

Therapists should use the concept of grounded cognition in concert with tools such as the International
Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) to guide their interventions.81 These tools can
guide therapists to think beyond impairment and perceptual-motor function to participation in activities
with objects, people, and events that afford learning. Furthermore, they can guide therapists to consider
how this participation can broadly advance future development and learning abilities. For instance, it is not
sufficient to provide interventions to advance early locomotor behavior in social and behavioral isolation.
Therapists can best advance future development for their clients by setting goals and designing
interventions that allow clients frequent, daily opportunities to use their perceptual-motor abilities to
maximize their interactions with objects, people, and events. Thus, in the case of locomotion, 1 component
of an intervention could be to educate team members to provide daily opportunities for a child to crawl or
walk among caregivers and peers while gesturing, naming, turn taking, and exploring a variety of objects
rather than locomoting in isolated environments separate from peer interactions, play, and problem
solving.

Incorporation of the concept of grounded development into physical therapist practice requires rethinking
the way in which physical therapist students and practicing physical therapists are taught about learning.
Currently, physical therapist education programs emphasize and teach students about the concepts of
motor learning. Yet, mounting evidence for the proposal that the broader construct of cognition is
grounded in perceptual-motor experience presents a challenge to think about learning less as a domain-
specific phenomenon and more as a phenomenon with consistencies across domain and time. Thelen2
argued that across the life span, the processes at work when people learn perceptual-motor behaviors must
be the same as those at work when they learn cognitive skills. Therefore, it is no longer sufficient to teach
about theories of motor learning in isolation.

On the contrary, physical therapists need to be educated about the grounded cognition literature from fields
such as developmental psychology and education so that they can design the most effective interventions
and understand the broader impact of those interventions. Educators and researchers in the field of
physical therapy are the best equipped to assimilate and translate the growing body of research findings
across disciplines, all of which have their own challenging jargon, so that clinicians can make use of the
most recent findings to benefit their clients. We encourage these professionals to pursue these activities by
creating book chapters, review articles, perspective articles, and continuing education courses. Physical
therapists need to be aware of such research to ensure that theories and methods of practice evolve to
reflect and keep pace with what current science suggests is best practice.

Finally, we propose that physical therapist researchers incorporate the concept of grounded cognition into
their studies. Most research supporting this concept is fairly recent (within the last few decades) and has
not been conducted in the field of physical therapy.10 Dynamical systems theory is likely a useful tool for
capturing and describing the mind-body-world interconnections underlying the concept of grounded
cognition.2 Yet, although the dynamical systems theory is predominant in much of the current physical
therapy literature, the concept of grounded cognition has not been incorporated into physical therapy
research. Perhaps the greatest challenge to incorporating grounded cognition into physical therapy research
involves identifying the behaviors and abilities across domains that may be influenced through perceptual-
motor interventions and choosing the appropriate assessments to capture these broader changes.
We propose that physical therapist researchers begin to meet this challenge and incorporate the grounded
cognition concept into their research designs by reviewing the literature more broadly, using a greater
range of assessment tools, and collaborating with experts in complementary fields of development.
Pursuing these activities can provide answers to important questions relating to clinical practice and can
determine how perceptual-motor interventions can positively affect cognition, communication, social
interaction, and other abilities that are important in improving daily function and quality of life for
children and families. This information would lend critical empirical support to best clinical practices and
would further solidify the importance of physical therapy to those outside of the field who make important
decisions about the provision of and payment for physical therapist services.

Footnotes
Dr Lobo, Dr Harbourne, and Dr Dusing provided concept/idea/project design. All authors provided writing. Dr Lobo
provided project management. Dr Dusing provided fund procurement.

The authors acknowledge the following funding sources for bringing them together to form the Early Learning
Consortium: American Physical Therapy Association, Section on Pediatrics, Planning Grant 2008 (Does Early Postural
Intervention Affect Sitting Balance or Reaching in Infants Born Preterm? Principal Investigator: Susan C. Dusing, PT,
PhD, January 1, 2009July 1, 2011); and NIH/NCMRR/NICHD/NINDS grant 1K12HD055931-01 (Multicenter Career
Development Program for Physical and Occupational Therapists and Comprehensive Opportunities in Rehabilitation
Research Training Program. Principal Investigator: Michael Mueller, PT, PhD, FAPTA, September 15, 2007August 31,
2012).

References
1. Radford L. The ethics of being and knowing: towards a cultural theory of learning. In: Schubring G,
Seeger F, editors. Semiotics in Mathematics Education: Epistemology, History, Classroom, and Culture.
Rotterdam, the Netherlands: Sense Publishers; 2008:215234

2. Thelen E. Grounded in the world: developmental origins of the embodied mind. Infancy. 2000;1:328

3. Campos JJ, Anderson DI, Barbu-Roth MA, et al. Travel broadens the mind. Infancy. 2000;1:149219

4. Lobo MA, Galloway JC. Enhanced handling and positioning in early infancy advances development
throughout the first year. Child Dev. 2012;83:12901302 [PubMed: 22540738]

5. Gabriel MAM, Alonso CRP, Bertolo JD, et al. Age of sitting unsupported and independent walking in
very low birth weight preterm infants with normal motor development at 2 years. Acta Paediatr.
2009;98:18151821 [PubMed: 19807707]

6. Ruff HA, McCarton C, Kurtzberg D, Vaughan HG., Jr. Preterm infants' manipulative exploration of
objects. Child Dev. 1984;55:11661173 [PubMed: 6488951]

7. Matlin MW. Cognition. 7th ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc; 2009

8. Barsalou LW. Grounded cognition. Annu Rev Psychol. 2008;59:617645 [PubMed: 17705682]

9. Gibson EJ. Exploratory behavior in the development of perceiving, acting, and the acquiring of
knowledge. Annu Rev Psychol. 1988;39:141

10. Barsalou LW. Grounded cognition: past, present, and future. Top Cogn Sci. 2010;2:716724

11. Piaget J. The Origins of Intelligence in Children. New York, NY: Norton; 1952

12. Prawat RS. Cognitive theory at the crossroads: head fitting, head splitting, or somewhere in between?
Hum Dev. 1999;42:5977
13. Fields RD. Myelination: an overlooked mechanism of synaptic plasticity? Neuroscientist.
2005;11:528531 [PMCID: PMC1474837] [PubMed: 16282593]

14. Milgrom J, Newnham C, Anderson PJ, et al. Early sensitivity training for parents of preterm infants:
impact on the developing brain. Pediatr Res. 2010;67:330335 [PubMed: 19952869]

15. Driemeyer J, Boyke J, Gaser C, et al. Changes in gray matter induced by learningrevisited. PLoS
One. 2008;3:e2669. [PMCID: PMC2447176] [PubMed: 18648501]

16. Nunez RE, Edwards LD, Matos JF. Embodied cognition as grounding for situatedness and context in
mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics. 1999;39:4565

17. Smith L, Gasser M. The development of embodied cognition: six lessons from babies. Artificial Life.
2005;11:1329 [PubMed: 15811218]

18. Smith LB. Cognition as a dynamic system: principles from embodiment. Dev Rev. 2005;25:278298

19. Thelen E, Schoner G, Scheier C, Smith LB. The dynamics of embodiment: a field theory of infant
perseverative reaching. Behav Brain Sci. 2001;24:186 [PubMed: 11515285]

20. Araujo D, Davids K. Ecological approaches to cognition and action in sport and exercise: ask not only
what you do, but where you do it. Int J Sport Psychol. 2009;40:537

21. Blauw-Hospers CH, Hadders-Algra M. A systematic review of the effects of early intervention on
motor development. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2005;47:421432 [PubMed: 15934492]

22. Barnett WS, Hustedt JT. Head Start's lasting benefits. Infants Young Child. 2005;18:1624

23. Yoshikawa H. Long term effects of early childhood programs on social outcomes and delinquency.
Future Child. 1995;5:5175 [PubMed: 8835514]

24. Blauw-Hospers CH, de Graaf-Peters VB, Dirks T, et al. Does early intervention in infants at high risk
for a developmental motor disorder improve motor and cognitive development? Neurosci Biobehav Rev.
2007;31:12011212 [PubMed: 17555816]

25. Brooks-Gunn J, Liaw FR, Klebanov PK. Effects of early intervention on cognitive function of low-
birth weight preterm infants. J Pediatr. 1992;120:350359 [PubMed: 1538279]

26. Spittle AJ, Orton J, Doyle LW, Boyd R. Early developmental intervention programs post hospital
discharge to prevent motor and cognitive impairments in preterm infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev.
2007;(2):CD005495

27. Whitehurst GJ, Zevenbergen AA, Crone DA, et al. Outcomes of an emergent literacy intervention from
Head Start through second grade. J Educ Psychol. 1999;91:261272

28. Orton J, Spittle A, Doyle L, et al. Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor
outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2009;51:851
859 [PubMed: 19732117]

29. Needham A, Barrett T, Peterman K. A pick-me-up for infants' exploratory skills: early simulated
experiences reaching for objects using sticky mittens enhances young infants' object exploration skills.
Infant Behav Dev. 2002;25:279295

30. Karasik LB, Tamis-LeMonda CS, Adolph KE. Transition from crawling to walking and infants' actions
with objects and people. Child Dev. 2011;82:11991209 [PMCID: PMC3163171] [PubMed: 21545581]
31. Lockman JJ, Ashmead DH, Bushnell EW. The development of anticipatory hand orientation during
infancy. J Exp Child Psychol. 1984;37:176186 [PubMed: 6707575]

32. Thelen E, Corbetta D, Kamm K, et al. The transition to reaching: mapping intention and intrinsic
dynamics. Child Dev. 1993;64:10581098 [PubMed: 8404257]

33. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL. Hand movements: a window into haptic object recognition. Cogn Psychol.
1987;19:342368 [PubMed: 3608405]

34. Needham A. Improvements in object exploration skills may facilitate the development of object
segregation in early infancy. J Cogn Dev. 2000;1:131156

35. Needham A. Object recognition and object segregation in 4.5-month-old infants. J Exp Child Psychol.
2001;78:324 [PubMed: 11161419]

36. Lederman SJ, Klatzky RL. Extracting object properties through haptic exploration. Acta Psychol.
1993;84:2940

37. Lobo MA, Galloway JC. Postural and object-oriented experiences advance early reaching, object
exploration, and means-end behavior. Child Dev. 2008;79:18691890 [PubMed: 19037955]

38. Libertus K, Needham A. Early reaching experiences: immediate, short-term, and long-term effects.
Paper presented at: The Society for Research in Child Development Biennial Meeting; March 31April 2,
2011; Montreal, Quebec, Canada

39. Harbourne RT, Stergiou N. Movement variability and the use of nonlinear tools: principles to guide
physical therapist practice. Phys Ther. 2009;89:267282 [PMCID: PMC2652347] [PubMed: 19168711]

40. Lefevre C. Posture, muscular tone and visual attention in 5-month-old infants. Infant Child Dev.
2002;11:335346

41. Bornstein MH, Hahn CS, Bell C, et al. Stability in cognition across early childhood: a developmental
cascade. Psychol Sci. 2006;17:151158 [PubMed: 16466423]

42. Rochat P, Goubet N. Development of sitting and reaching in 5- to 6-month-old infants. Infant Behav
Dev. 1995;18:5368

43. Johnson SP. How infants learn about the visual world. Cogn Sci. 2010;34:11581184
[PMCID: PMC2992385] [PubMed: 21116440]

44. Berger SE. Locomotor expertise predicts infants' perseverative errors. Dev Psychol. 2010;46:326336
[PubMed: 20210493]

45. Clearfield MW. The role of crawling and walking experience in infant spatial memory. J Exp Child
Psychol. 2004;89:214241 [PubMed: 15501452]

46. Iverson JM. Developing language in a developing body: the relationship between motor development
and language development. J Child Lang. 2010;37:229261 [PMCID: PMC2833284] [PubMed: 20096145]

47. Klatzky R. Stages of manual exploration in haptic object identification. Percept Psychophys.
1992;52:661670 [PubMed: 1287570]

48. Fagan MK, Iverson JM. The influence of mouthing on infant vocalization. Infancy. 2007;11:191202
[PMCID: PMC2600509] [PubMed: 19081776]

49. Iverson JM, Fagan MK. Infant vocal-motor coordination: precursor to the gesture-speech system?
Child Dev. 2004;75:10531066 [PubMed: 15260864]

50. Lifter K, Bloom L. Object knowledge and the emergence of language. Infant Behav Dev.
1989;12:395423

51. Ross G, Nelson K, Wetstone H, Tanouye E. Acquisition and generalization of novel object concepts by
young language learners. J Child Lang. 1986;13:6783 [PubMed: 3949900]

52. Fogel A, Messinger DS, Dickson KL, Hsu HC. Posture and gaze in early mother-infant
communication: synchronization of developmental trajectories. Dev Sci. 1999;2:325332

53. Bakeman R, Adamson LB, Konner M, Barr RG. Kung infancy: the social context of object
exploration. Child Dev. 1990;61:794809 [PubMed: 2364754]

54. Lieberman P. Infant communication: cry and early speech. Contemporary Psychology. 1982;27:303
304

55. Yingling J. Temporal Features of Infant Speech: A Description of Babbling Patterns Circumscribed by
Postural Achievement [doctoral dissertation]. Denver, CO: University of Denver; 1981

56. Whitney PG, Green JA. Changes in infants' affect related to the onset of independent locomotion.
Infant Behav Dev. 2011;34:459466 [PubMed: 21641649]

57. Clearfield MW. Learning to walk changes infants' social interactions. Infant Behav Dev. 2011;34:15
25 [PubMed: 20478619]

58. Sigman M, Cohen SE, Beckwith L, Parmelee AH. Infant attention in relation to intellectual abilities in
childhood. Dev Psychol. 1986;22:788792

59. Lawson KR, Ruff HA. Early focused attention predicts outcome for children born prematurely. J Dev
Behav Pediatr. 2004;25:399406 [PubMed: 15613988]

60. Macturk RH, Vietze PM, McCarthy ME, et al. The organization of exploratory behavior in Down
syndrome and nondelayed infants. Child Dev. 1985;56:573581 [PubMed: 3159553]

61. Legerstee M, Weintraub J. The integration of person and object attention in infants with and without
Down syndrome. Infant Behav Dev. 1997;20:7182

62. Ruskin EM, Mundy P, Kasari C, Sigman M. Object mastery motivation of children with Down
syndrome. Am J Ment Retard. 1994;98:499509 [PubMed: 8148126]

63. Baranek GT, Barnett CR, Adams EM, et al. Object play in infants with autism: methodological issues
in retrospective video analysis. Am J Occup Ther. 2005;59:2030 [PubMed: 15707120]

64. Sigman M, Ungerer JA. Cognitive and language skills in autistic, mentally-retarded, and normal
children. Dev Psychol. 1984;20:293302

65. Ozonoff S, Macari S, Young GS, et al. Atypical object exploration at 12 months of age is associated
with autism in a prospective sample. Autism. 2008;12:457472 [PMCID: PMC2921192]
[PubMed: 18805942]

66. Wijnroks L, van Veldhoven N. Individual differences in postural control and cognitive development in
preterm infants. Infant Behav Dev. 2003;26:1426

67. Rendeli C, Salvaggio E, Cannizzaro GS, et al. Does locomotion improve the cognitive profile of
children with meningomyelocele? Childs Nerv Syst. 2002;18:231234 [PubMed: 12042922]
68. Marlow N, Hennessy EM, Bracewell MA, et al. Motor and executive function at 6 years of age after
extremely preterm birth. Pediatrics. 2007;120:793804 [PubMed: 17908767]

69. Lepage C, Noreau L, Bernard PM. Association between characteristics of locomotion and
accomplishment of life habits in children with cerebral palsy. Phys Ther. 1998;78:458469
[PubMed: 9597060]

70. Lobo MA, Galloway JC, Savelsbergh GJP. General and task-related experiences affect early object
interaction. Child Dev. 2004;75:12681281 [PubMed: 15260877]

71. Heathcock JC, Lobo MA, Galloway JC. Movement training advances the emergence of reaching in
infants born at less than 33 weeks of gestational age: a randomized clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2008;88:310
322 [PubMed: 18096650]

72. Brigham NB, Yoder PJ, Jarzynka MA, Tapp J. The sequential relationship between parent attentional
cues and sustained attention to objects in young children with autism. J Autism Dev Disord. 2010;40:200
208 [PMCID: PMC4137564] [PubMed: 19685286]

73. Hadders-Algra M, Brogren E, Forssberg H. Training affects the development of postural adjustments
in sitting infants. J Physiol. 1996;493:289298 [PMCID: PMC1158969] [PubMed: 8735713]

74. Harbourne RT, Willett S, Kyvelidou A, et al. A comparison of interventions for children with cerebral
palsy to improve sitting postural control: a clinical trial. Phys Ther. 2010;90:118

75. Damiano DL, DeJong SL. A systematic review of the effectiveness of treadmill training and body
weight support in pediatric rehabilitation. J Neurol Phys Ther. 2009;33:2744 [PMCID: PMC2982788]
[PubMed: 19265768]

76. Ulrich DA, Ulrich BD, Angulo-Kinzler RM, Yun J. Treadmill training of infants with Down syndrome:
evidence-based developmental outcomes. Pediatrics. 2001;108:U42U48

77. Lynch A, Ryu J, Agrawal S, Galloway JC. Power mobility training for a 7-month-old infant with spina
bifida. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2009;21:362368 [PubMed: 19923977]

78. Ragonesi CB, Chen X, Agrawal S, Galloway JC. Power mobility and socialization in preschool: a case
study of a child with cerebral palsy. Pediatr Phys Ther. 2010;22:322329 [PubMed: 20699785]

79. Dirks T, Hadders-Algra M. The role of the family in intervention of infants at high risk of cerebral
palsy: a systematic analysis. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2011;53:6267 [PubMed: 21950397]

80. Blauw-Hospers CH, Dirks T, Hulshof LJ, et al. Pediatric physical therapy in infancy: from nightmare
to dream? A two-arm randomized trial. Phys Ther. 2011;91:13231338 [PubMed: 21719636]

81. Atkinson HL, Nixon-Cave K. A tool for clinical reasoning and reflection using the International
Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) framework and patient management model.
Phys Ther. 2011;91:416430 [PubMed: 21273627]

Figures and Tables

Figure 1.
(A) More traditional view of cognition as something that exists outside of one's everyday experiences. (B) Grounded view
of cognition as something that is created, maintained, and altered by everyday perceptual-motor experiences within social
and cultural contexts.

Figure 2.

Hypothetical trajectories from birth toward level of readiness to learn and participate in preschool at 3 years of age. The
hypothetical onsets of object interaction, sitting, and locomotion behaviors are indicated by the circle, triangle, and
square, respectively, on each trajectory. In the typical development trajectory, object interaction, sitting, and locomotion
emerge in the first year of life and act as vehicles to provide children with the tools needed to be successful in school. In
the trajectory for children who have developmental delays and are provided ineffective or no early intervention services,
object interaction, sitting, and locomotion behaviors emerge later and are performed less frequently and less variably
resulting in poorer cognitive development and lack of readiness to learn and participate by preschool age. The trajectory
for children with developmental delays shows how this situation can be transformed with effective early intervention
targeting early perceptual-motor behaviors to advance cognition and readiness to learn in school.

Table.
Recommendations for Incorporating the Concept of Grounded Cognition Into Early Intervention Practice,
Education, and Research

Articles from Physical Therapy are provided here courtesy of American Physical Therapy Association