The development of categorisation and conceptual thinking in early childhood: methods and limitations

Abstract

We present a systematic and qualitative review of academic literature on early conceptual development (0-24 months of age), with an emphasis on methodological aspects. The final sample of our review included 281 studies reported in 115 articles. The main aims of the article were four: first, to organise studies into sets according to methodological similarities and differences; second, to elaborate on the methodological procedures that characterise each set; third, to circumscribe the empirical indicators that different sets of studies consider as proof of the existence of concepts in early childhood; last, to identify methodological limitations and to propose possible ways to overcome them. We grouped the studies into five sets: preference and habituation experiments, category extension tasks, object sorting tasks, sequential touching tasks and object examination tasks. In the "Results" section, we review the core features of each set of studies. In the "Discussion" and "Conclusions" sections, we describe, for one thing, the most relevant methodological shortcomings. We end by arguing that a situated, semiotic and pragmatic perspective that emphasises the importance of ecological validity could open up new avenues of research to better understand the development of concepts in early childhood.

Odour detection in children and young people with profound intellectual and multiple disabilities

“…Discrimination is the ability to respond selectively to specific individual odours, while categorisation means to ‘group discriminable properties, objects, or events into classes (…)’ (Rakison & Lawson, 2013 , p. 4) and to respond to groups of odours. A large number of studies highlight the possibility that categorical abilities exist already at the very onset of development and may be expressed ‘in concept‐like behaviours’ (Alessandroni & Rodriguez, 2020 , p. 2). In the present research, the setting was not specifically designed to observe the participants' categorical abilities and it would be unsuitable to overreach the findings in terms of mechanisms underlying the behaviours observed; even so, given the clear differential reactions between both groups of stimuli, and by analogy with the developmental data, the presence of prelinguistic categorisation abilities cannot be excluded.…”

The more they hear the more they learn? Using data from bilinguals to test models of early lexical development

“…For example, for children to functionally use their knowledge of the word "ball" and show comprehension, they might first hear their parents say, "bring the ball", and then control their gaze to look for the object amongst several candidates, identify the object, and then produce a behaviour such as walking towards it and picking it up. While looking-while-listening is necessarily an indirect measure of children's full knowledge (Alessandroni & Rodríguez, 2020), examining bilingual and monolingual children's performance in this task across ages provides several insights into how maturation and experience contribute to word comprehension and word learning.…”

Los supuestos filosóficos en psicología del desarrollo: ¿Meta teoría o marco epistémico?

“…Cuándo los psicólogos -que son legión-aíslan a los métodos experimentales en el laboratorio, o a las estadísticas, como generadoras per se de los conocimientos, respecto de las teorías, presupuestos, o la naturaleza de los problemas planteados (Theo, 2011), creyéndolos suficientes para producir y validar los conocimientos. Entre tantos otros, ciertos estudios experimentales de laboratorio sobre el desarrollo conceptual en niños de la primera infancia (Alessandroni y Rodríguez, 2020). Pero su obligatoriedad -vivida por los psicólogosrequiere de normas institucionales, a veces administrativas y políticas, asociadas con la posición de los investigadores en el campo académico y bajo ciertas condiciones históricas.…”