The effects of three variables on children's concepts of physical causality.

Nass, Martin L.

doi:10.1037/h0044090

Cited by 46 publications

(21 citation statements)

References 9 publications

(10 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In naturalistic explanations children attribute an exclusively material character to the process under discussion and involve concepts such as spatial contiguity, mechanical contact, temporal ordering, and logical deduction (Nass, 1956;Berzonsky, 1971;Gelman & Kremer, 1991;Springer & Keil, 1991).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Each dimension will be presented and illustrated by relevant examples. Children's explanations are distinguished based on previous categorizations proposed by Nass (1956) and used by Berzonsky (1971), according to which children's explanations can be either naturalistic, or non-naturalistic.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, familiarity with the phenomenon about which children reason seems to be an important factor in the selection of explanatory mode, i.e., the preschoolers' explanatory performance ranges widely depending on the conceptual field their explanations fall within, and are more confident in giving naturalistic explanations about familiar rather than remote natural kinds (Nass, 1956;Berzonsky, 1971). Thus, preschoolers can be proficient in causal thinking and capable of applying physical causality to familiar objects, probably directly experienced by them, such as changes concerning plants.…”

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Preschool Children's Explanations of Plant Growth and Rain Formation: A Comparative Analysis

Christidou

Hatzinikita

2005

Res Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper explores the different types and characteristics of preschool children's explanations of plant growth and rain formation. The children's explanations were categorized as naturalistic, non-naturalistic, or synthetic, i.e., explanations containing both naturalistic and nonnaturalistic parts. In regards to plant growth the children tended to rely on synthetic or on naturalistic explanations, which involved direct and indirect agents (such as water, a person, fertilizers, roots) enabling the plant to grow. Non-naturalistic explanations of plant growth, or the nonnaturalistic parts of synthetic explanations, were mainly animistic (anthropomorphic). In the case of rain formation the children most frequently used non-naturalistic explanations, which were mainly teleological or metaphysical. The naturalistic explanations recorded on rain formation, as well as the naturalistic parts of synthetic explanations tended to have a non-agentive character, i.e., children considered rainwater as preexisting in containers such as the clouds. Overall, the explanations recorded about plant growth tended to be more complex than the ones for rain formation. It is suggested that science activities designed for preschool children should take into account the types and characteristics of their explanations in order to select which phenomena are appropriate for this age group, and aim at fostering the children's ability at formulating naturalistic explanations.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 98%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Preschool Children's Explanations of Plant Growth and Rain Formation: A Comparative Analysis

Christidou

Hatzinikita

2005

Res Sci Educ

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Such questions investigate the nature of things, not the causes of specific events. Explications of familiar, normal functions are often sought by why questions, but also by how and what makes it work questions (Berzonsky, 1971;Nass, 1956;Shultz&Kestenbaum, 1984). Thus, Berzonsky (1971, p. 712) concluded from studies on 6-and 7-yearold children that "Explaining what makes a clock tick requires a description of the whole mechanical system of a clock, whereas the failure of a clock to tick may be attributed to a single factor.…”

Section: Selection Of Explanations By Questionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Conversational processes and causal explanation.

Hilton¹

1990

Psychological Bulletin

404

342

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Causal explanation takes place in and takes the form of conversation. Explanations are selected by questions and are thus governed by general rules of discourse. A conversational model of causal explanation is introduced that explicates social aspects of the explanation process by postulating that good explanations must be relevant to the focus of a why question, as well as being true. The notion of explanatory relevance enables an integration of the major models of the attribution process by showing that they use the same counterfactual logic but address different causal questions. The conversational perspective suggests a reinterpretation of many attributional biases, and also highlights the role of interpersonal goals in generating implicit questions, which in turn constrain explanations. Finally, the relevance of the conversational perspective for research on causal networks, the social context of explanation, and intrapsychic explanation is noted.Causal explanation is first and foremost a form of social interaction. One speaks of giving causal explanations, but not attributions, perceptions, comprehensions, categorizations, or memories. The verb to explain is a three-place predicate: Someone explains something to someone. Causal explanation takes the form of conversation and is thus subject to the rules of conversation.Causal explanation is therefore different from causal attribution, which does not involve an interpersonal exchange. In its wider sense, attribution describes a process whereby one ascribes some phenomenon to its origin. Thus, one attributes effects to causes, actions to intentions, and sayings to their authors. This sense of attribution is close to that which Heider (1958) had in mind when writing of how the sensation of light reflecting ofFa surface may be attributed to its distal source, the sun, or how an exam performance may be attributed to its source in a student's ability, effort, or luck. Thus, attributing something to someone is not the same as explaining something to that person.The difference between this sense of attribution and conversational explanation is nicely drawn out by the experience of U.S. Senator Joseph Biden. During his campaign for the 1988 Democratic Party nomination for president, Biden gave an impassioned campaign speech about social inequality that faithThis research was conducted while I was supported by the Cognitive Science committee of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. Portions of this article were read at the "Beyond Assertion" conference, Cleves, West Germany, September 3-5, 1987, and at the meeting of the Society for Experimental Social Psychology, Madison, Wisconsin, October 20-22, 1988.I would like to thank Ulf Bockenholt; Eirian Davies; Miles Hewstone; Robin Hogarth; Douglas Medin; Ben Slugoski; Richard Smith; the action editor, Nancy Cantor; and two anonymous referees for helpful comments on earlier drafts of this article and Curt Haugeveldt and Alan Strathman for help in preparation of the figures.Correspondence concerning this article...

show abstract

“…Nass (1956) explains these findings on the basis that withdrawn children are unable to disassociate themselves from the world.…”

Section: Piaget's Theory Of Animismmentioning

confidence: 99%

Realism of fears and children's animistic thinking

Tschanz

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effects of three variables on children's concepts of physical causality.

Cited by 46 publications

References 9 publications

Preschool Children's Explanations of Plant Growth and Rain Formation: A Comparative Analysis

Preschool Children's Explanations of Plant Growth and Rain Formation: A Comparative Analysis

Conversational processes and causal explanation.

Realism of fears and children's animistic thinking

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About