Developmental “Roots” in Mature Biological Knowledge

Goldberg, Robert F.; Thompson-Schill, Sharon L.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2009.02320.x

Cited by 104 publications

(142 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

134

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Prior research has shown that when correct scientific theories are learned, they do not supplant incorrect naïve beliefs, but rather suppress them during scientific reasoning, especially under speeded conditions (Goldberg & Thompson-Schill, 2009;Kelemen & Rosset, 2009;Knobe & Samuels, 2013;Shtulman & Valcarcel, 2012). This suggests a central role for inhibition when evaluating theoretical assumptions against disconfirming evidence.…”

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Middle School Students’ Approaches to Reasoning about Disconfirming Evidence

Varma¹,

Boekel²,

Varma³

2018

JEDP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated differences in how middle school children reason about disconfirming evidence. Scientists evaluate hypotheses against evidence, rejecting those that are disconfirmed. Although this instant rationality propels empirical science, it works less for theoretical science, where it is often necessary to delay rationality -to tolerate disconfirming evidence in the short run. We used behavioral measures to identify two groups of middle-school children: strict reasoners who prefer instant rationality and quickly dismiss disconfirmed hypotheses, and permissive reasoners who prefer delayed rationality and retain disconfirmed hypotheses for further evaluation. We measured their scientific reasoning performance as well as their cognitive ability and motivational orientation. What distinguished the groups was not overall differences in these variables, but their predictive relation. For strict reasoners, better scientific reasoning was associated with faster processing, whereas for permissive reasoners, better scientific reasoning was associated with more deliberate thinking -slower processing and broader consideration of both disconfirmed and alternate hypotheses. These findings expand our understanding of "normative" scientific reasoning.

show abstract

Section: Limitations and Future Directionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Middle School Students’ Approaches to Reasoning about Disconfirming Evidence

Varma¹,

Boekel²,

Varma³

2018

JEDP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This work shows that undergraduates utilize anthropocentric thinking in some situations, but it does not address whether anthropocentric thinking is a developmentally persistent cognitive default or an acquired cognitive strategy. Beyond college-age students, Goldberg and Thompson-Schill (2009) showed that biology professors were slower and less accurate when categorizing plants as "living things" compared to animals. Their results suggest an anthropocentric hesitance, even among practicing biologists, to attribute universal biological properties to organisms that are highly dissimilar to humans.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anthropocentric by Default? Attribution of Familiar and Novel Properties to Living Things

Arenson

Coley

2017

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Humans naturally and effortlessly use a set of cognitive tools to reason about biological entities and phenomena. Two such tools, essentialist thinking and teleological thinking, appear to be early developmental cognitive defaults, used extensively in childhood and under limited circumstances in adulthood, but prone to reemerge under time pressure or cognitive load. We examine the nature of another such tool: anthropocentric thinking. In four experiments, we examined patterns of property attribution to a wide range of living and non-living objects, manipulating time pressure, response type, and property (either novel or familiar) in a total of 471 participants. Results showed no tendency toward increased similarity-based attribution patterns indicative of anthropocentric thinking under time pressure. However, anthropocentric thinking was consistently observed for unfamiliar properties. These findings suggest that anthropocentric thinking is not a developmentally persistent cognitive default, but rather a cognitive strategy deliberately employed in situations of uncertainty.

show abstract

“…Opfer and Siegler (2004) argue that the extension of living things is directly constrained by the knowledge of prevalence of goal directed movement. The role of movement in the representation of living things is attested in adult research (Goldberg & Thompson-Schill 2009;Kerbe, 2016). Goldberg & Thompson-Schill (2009) show that even biology experts tend to process animates as 'better' living things than plants.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Although there is no reason to expect the mature concept to exclude fungi, researchers characterize adults as attributing life to just animals and plants (e.g. Carey, 1985;Goldberg & Thompson-Schill, 2009;Hatano et al, 1993;Laurendeau & Pinard, 1962;Leddon, Waxman, & Medin, 2008).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…For the purpose of the present analysis I propose that the mature lay representation of living things is divided into four components: 1) adults explicitly represent living things as a grouping of all biological beings (Carey, 1985;Goldberg & Thompson-Schill, 2009;Hatano et al, 1993;Laurendeau & Pinard, 1962;Leddon, Waxman, & Medin, 2008), 2) they are aware of commonalities within living kinds (Gelman, 2003;Inagaki & Hatano, 2002), 3) they represent these commonalities as central elements of their naïve biological theory, which is a domain specific system of causally interrelated beliefs about biological beings (Carey, 1985), and 4) the representation of living things has inductive potential (Carey, 1985;Inagaki & Hatano, 2002). A category has inductive potential when it supports induction, which means that "it is used as the basis for novel inferences about the world" (Gelman, 2003, p. 26), for example, when a person learns a novel fact about an animal and, relying on the representation of living things, generalizes this fact to a plant (Inagaki & Hatano, 2002).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

The reliance on inclusive living thing in inductive inference among 5-year-olds: the role of access to nature and the size of receptive vocabulary

Tarłowski

2017

Psychology of Language and Communication

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study employed a serial forced choice inductive inference paradigm to test whether rural and urban 5-year-olds varying in SES rely on the representation of living things in extending new knowledge. Sixty-five children learned that humans possess a novel internal property and, in a series of test trials, had to decide whether to attribute the property to an inanimate living thing or to an artifact. Additionally, the size of children's receptive vocabulary was assessed. This study provides the first evidence that those 5-year-olds who have access to rich nature and who have acquired a high level of receptive vocabulary do rely on living kinds in induction in a forced choice task. The study further underscores the necessity to include children with diverse backgrounds in research on the development of biological knowledge. It also provides new evidence that general cognitive ability links to advances in children's biological understanding.

show abstract

Developmental “Roots” in Mature Biological Knowledge

Cited by 104 publications

References 37 publications

Middle School Students’ Approaches to Reasoning about Disconfirming Evidence

Middle School Students’ Approaches to Reasoning about Disconfirming Evidence

Anthropocentric by Default? Attribution of Familiar and Novel Properties to Living Things

The reliance on inclusive living thing in inductive inference among 5-year-olds: the role of access to nature and the size of receptive vocabulary

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About