Matching and Equivalence Judgments in Very Young Children

Daehler, Marvin W.; Lonardo, Rita; Bukatko, Danuta

doi:10.2307/1129053

Cited by 60 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Children 2 ½ years old are much more successful at finding a toy hidden in a room when they see an experimenter simply point to the correct location in a picture of the room than when they observe a miniature toy being hidden in a model of the room. This result is counterintuitive in that there is a large literature showing pictures to be generally less effective than three-dimensional objects in supporting learning, memory, categorization, and other cognitive activities (e.g., Daehler, Leonardo, & Bukatko, 1979;DeLoache, 1986;Hartley, 1976;Sigel, Anderson, & Shapiro, 1966;Steinberg, 1974). The a priori prediction of a counterintuitive result lends strong support to the concept of dual representation in symbol understanding and use.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Dual Representation and Young Children's Use of Scale Models

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To use a symbolic object such as a model, map, or picture, one must achieve dual representation; that is, one must mentally represent both the symbol itself and its relation to its referent. The studies reported here confirm predictions derived from this concept. As hypothesized, dual representation was as difficult for 2 1/2-year-olds to achieve with a set of individual objects as it was with an integrated model. Decreasing the physical salience of a scale model (by placing it behind a window) made it easier for 2 1/2-year-old children to treat it as a representation of something other than itself. Conversely, increasing the model's salience as an object (by allowing 3-year-old children to manipulate it) made it more difficult to appreciate its symbolic import. The results provide strong support for dual representation.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Dual Representation and Young Children's Use of Scale Models

2000

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…While the notion of a strong reliance on shape can help to account for the preponderance of basic-level words in children's early vocabularies, it is clear that at a later point children can and do go beyond the basic-level object names. Thus, children's emphasis on shape gradually decreases during the third year, a time at which children are beginning to acquire superordinate labels (Daehler, Lonardo & Bukatko, 1979;Rosch, Mervis, Gray, Johnson & Boyes-Braem, 1976). By 3 years of age, children are able to take both factors into account, that is, perceptual similarity and category membership, when deciding how to generalize a label.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The role of shape similarity in toddlers’ lexical extensions

Poulin‐Dubois

Frank

Graham

et al. 1999

British J of Dev Psycho

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The taxonomic assumption, or noun-category bias, is thought to facilitate word learning by focusing children's attention on taxonomic categories as likely candidates for word meanings. Three experiments were conducted to disentangle the role of taxonomic relations and shape similarity in 18-and 24-month-olds' responses on a noun category bias task. The relationship between vocabulary composition and performance on these tasks was also examined. Results indicated that both 18-and 24-month-old children were predominantly guided by shape similarity when extending novel labels. However, some evidence that taxonomic information can be used to guide word extension was found in the 24-month-old group. Those children with a larger proportion of nouns in their vocabulary were more likely to use information about category membership when extending words, even in the absence of shape similarity.

show abstract

“…Rosch et al (1976a) and Daehler et al (1979) fo und that young children can solve simple sorting problems at the basic level before solving them at the superordinate level. Mervis & Crisafi (198 1), using artificial category hierarchies, found that 21;2-year-olds were able to sort basic level triads correctly, but could not sort either superordinate or subordinate level triads.…”

Section: Basic Level Categoriesmentioning

confidence: 99%