Preschoolers' Understanding of Knowing-That and Knowing-How in the United States and Hong Kong.

Tardif, Twila; Wellman, Henry M.; Fung, Kitty Y.; Liu, David; Fuxi, Fang

doi:10.1037/0012-1649.41.3.562

Cited by 22 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The latter finding resolves a long‐standing discrepancy in the literature regarding the effect of person on knowing , which was likely due to most previous studies being underpowered. The current findings replicated the one sufficiently powered previous study (Tardif et al., , study 1). The current findings also replicated previous findings regarding the ages at which children accurately attributed seeing to others (i.e., age 3; Masangkay et al., ) and knowing to others (i.e., age 4; Hogrefe, Wimmer, & Perner, ; Mossler, Marvin, & Greenberg, ; Wellman & Liu, ).…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

“…This explanation is not supported, however, because Ruffman and Olson () and Tardif et al. (, study 1) both used “yes–no” questions, and like Wimmer et al. () found earlier understanding of knowing for self than for other.…”

mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Regarding knowing , five studies (Pratt & Bryant, , studies 2 and 3; Ruffman & Olson, ; Tardif, Wellman, Fung, Liu, & Fang, , study 1; Wimmer, Hogrefe, & Perner, ; Woolley & Wellman, ) have tested for an effect of person, but results were inconsistent. (Pillow, ; Povinelli & DeBlois, ; Pratt & Bryant, , study 1; Tardif et al., , study 2 also included self and other knowledge questions, but like Flavell, they assessed egocentrism and do not provide unambiguous tests of the effect of person.)…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Four studies had sample sizes between 32 and 45; the outlier was Tardif et al. (, study 1) with 144. As would be expected with low power (Egger, Davey Smith, Schneider, & Minder, ), the number of children who passed the self task and failed the other task varied widely, from 6% in Pratt and Bryant () to 48% in Ruffman and Olson ().…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Introspection Plays an Early Role in Children's Explicit Theory of Mind Development

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study assessed children's (N = 236) ability to introspect the mental states of seeing and knowing relative to their ability to attribute each state to others. Children could introspect seeing 10 months before they could introspect knowing. Two- and 3-year-olds correctly reported their own seeing states, whereas 3- and 4-year-olds correctly reported their own knowing states. For each mental state, there was a 7-month difference before children could correctly attribute that state to another. These findings indicate that knowing is more difficult to introspect than seeing and that the ability to introspect each mental state emerges prior to the ability to correctly attribute them to others. Theoretical implications for self-other differences in theory-of-mind development are considered.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 91%

mentioning

confidence: 93%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Introspection Plays an Early Role in Children's Explicit Theory of Mind Development

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, a toddler, Grandpa, and a dog all run, but do so in very different ways (Golinkoff et al ., 2002). A final explanation has to do with input: English‐speaking parents tend to request that their children repeat noun labels but act out verb meanings (Goldfield, 2000; see also Tardif et al ., 2005). Even in verb‐favored Asian languages, parents talk more about objects than actions to young children (Fernald & Morikawa, 1993).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An image is worth a thousand words: why nouns tend to dominate verbs in early word learning

McDonough

Song

Hirsh‐Pasek

et al. 2011

Developmental Science

113

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nouns are generally easier to learn than verbs (e.g., Bornstein, 2005;Bornstein et al., 2004;Gentner, 1982;Maguire, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff, 2006). Yet, verbs appear in children's earliest vocabularies, creating a seeming paradox. This paper examines one hypothesis about the difference between noun and verb acquisition. Perhaps the advantage nouns have is not a function of grammatical form class but rather related to a word's imageability. Here, word imageability ratings and form class (nouns and verbs) were correlated with age of acquisition according to the MacArthur-Bates Communicative Development Inventory (CDI) (Fenson et al., 1994). CDI age of acquisition was negatively correlated with words' imageability ratings. Further, a word's imageability contributes to the variance of the word's age of acquisition above and beyond form class, suggesting that at the beginning of word learning, imageability might be a driving factor in word learning.Nouns tend to appear before verbs (Gentner, 1982) and to dominate English-speaking children's early lexicons (e.g., Fenson et al., 1994;Goldin-Meadow, Seligman, & Gelman, 1976). This finding has been replicated across the globe, with languages like German, Mandarin, Kaluli, Japanese, Turkish (Gentner, 1982), Spanish (Jackson-Maldonado, Thal, Marchman, Bates, & Gutierrez-Clellen, 1993), Italian (Caselli et al., 1995), French (Bassano, 2000;Parisse & Le Normand, 2000;Poulin-Dubois, Graham, & Sippola, 1995) and others (Bornstein, 2005;Bornstein et al., 2004; but see Tardif, Wellman, Fung, Liu, & Fang, 2005). Even in the laboratory, novel nouns are learned more quickly and easily than novel verbs (e.g., Childers & Tomasello, 2002;Golinkoff, Hirsh-Pasek, Bailey, & Wenger, 1992;Golinkoff, Jacquet, Hirsh-Pasek, & Nandakumar, 1996), a result also found in Japanese where verbs often appear in privileged, sentence-final positions (Imai, Haryu, & Okada, 2005) and in Chinese where verbs can appear in isolation Imai et al., 2008).Explanations for the preponderance of nouns in early vocabularies come in three forms. First, Kersten and Smith (2002) and Echols and Marti (2004) suggest an attentional explanation: Children preferentially attend to objects and prefer to map new names to objects rather than to the actions in which the objects are engaged. Only when children know the names of the objects will they go on to learn the names of the actions. Second, the disparity is based in perception: While objects are often stable in time and space, actions are fleeting and dynamic and unfold in time and space. Extracting a categorical representation (or the "verbal essence," Golinkoff et al., 2002) is more difficult than perceiving the object categories that nouns label (see also . Learning the name of an action requires that children perceptually abstract the invariants of the action (e.g., running) across multiple exemplars that show wide variation. For example, a toddler, Grandpa, and a dog all run, but do so in very different ways (Golinkoff et al., 2002). A final explanation h...

show abstract

Social Cognition and its Main Correlates in Childhood

Bulgarelli¹,

Henning²,

Bertin³

2022

The Wiley‐Blackwell Handbook of Childhood Social Development

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preschoolers' Understanding of Knowing-That and Knowing-How in the United States and Hong Kong.

Cited by 22 publications

References 34 publications

Introspection Plays an Early Role in Children's Explicit Theory of Mind Development

Introspection Plays an Early Role in Children's Explicit Theory of Mind Development

An image is worth a thousand words: why nouns tend to dominate verbs in early word learning

Social Cognition and its Main Correlates in Childhood

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About