The power of well-connected arguments: Early sensitivity to the connective because

Bernard, Stéphane; Mercier, Hugo; Clément, Fabrice

doi:10.1016/j.jecp.2011.07.003

Cited by 23 publications

(20 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…This finding is consistent with previous research indicating that 5‐year‐olds choose a noncircular explanation as the “best” explanation for why something occurs (Baum et al., ; Experiment 1). Note that these data suggest that 5‐year‐olds' evaluation of explanation quality extends beyond the evaluation of a single word (e.g., a causal connective because ; Bernard et al., ). Both the noncircular and circular explanations included a causal connective; thus, if children were simply monitoring for such target words, they should have been at chance in evaluating the explanations.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

“…Taken together, Experiments 1 and 2 support the conclusion that, counter to previous findings (Baum et al., ), preschoolers can judge the quality of an explanation by attending to the circularity of the argument. Moreover, preschoolers demonstrated this preference even though both explanations included the causal connective because (Bernard et al., ). Thus, these data extend previous work by showing that children's evaluation of explanation quality develops over the preschool years and is relatively robust by age 5 (Frazier et al., ; Mercier et al., in press).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Whereas 5‐year‐olds had a fragile preference for noncircular explanations, 10‐year‐olds displayed a robust preference. Similarly, Bernard, Mercier, and Clément () presented 3‐ to 5‐year‐olds with two speakers who provided differing explanations for the location of a hidden object. One explanation included the causal connective because, whereas the other explanation used the phatic term well (e.g., the ball is in “the blue box because Camille always puts her ball in the blue box” and “Well, Camille always puts her ball in the blue box”).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

“Why Does Rain Fall?”: Children Prefer to Learn From an Informant Who Uses Noncircular Explanations

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

These two studies explored 3- and 5-year-olds' evaluation of noncircular and circular explanations, and their use of such explanations to determine informant credibility. Although 5-year-olds demonstrated a selective preference for noncircular over circular explanations (Experiment 1: Long Explanations; Experiment 2: Short Explanations), 3-year-olds only demonstrated a preference for the noncircular when the explanations were shortened (Experiment 2). Children's evaluation of the explanations extended to their inferences about the informants' future credibility. Both age groups demonstrated a selective preference for learning novel explanations from an informant who had previously provided noncircular explanations-although only 5-year-olds also preferred to learn novel labels from her. The implications and scope of children's ability to monitor the quality of an informant's explanation are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

“Why Does Rain Fall?”: Children Prefer to Learn From an Informant Who Uses Noncircular Explanations

2014

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Children also make moral or cognitive judgments about their sources of information, favoring benevolent over malevolent informants (Mascaro & Sperber, ), or honest over dishonest informants (Lane, Wellman, & Gelman, ). Preference for an informant facilitates effective learning processes in children: for example, they prefer to learn from more familiar models (Corriveau & Harris, ; Kinzler et al., ), models they judge to be nicer (Landrum, Mills, & Johnston, ), models they deem more trustworthy because they show more certainty in their statements (Brosseau‐Liard & Poulin‐Dubois, ; Sabbagh & Baldwin, ), or models whose statements sound more logical (Bernard, Mercier, & Clément, ; Doebel & Koenig, ).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Group Membership Influences More Social Identification Than Social Learning or Overimitation in Children

et al. 2017

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Group membership is a strong driver of everyday life in humans, influencing similarity judgments, trust choices, and learning processes. However, its ontogenetic development remains to be understood. This study investigated how group membership, age, sex, and identification with a team influenced 39- to 60-month-old children (N = 94) in a series of similarity, trust, and learning tasks. Group membership had the most influence on similarity and trust tasks, strongly biasing choices toward in-groups. In contrast, prior experience and identification with the team were the most important factors in the learning tasks. Finally, overimitation occurred most when the children's team, but not the opposite, displayed meaningless actions. Future work must investigate how these cognitive abilities combine during development to facilitate cultural processes.

show abstract

“…Sin embargo, ya a la edad de 2 años es posible observar enunciados con la función de argumentar. Recientes estudios (Bernard, Mercier & Clément, 2012) muestran que los niños a partir de los 3 años ya son sensibles, en su rol de audiencia, al conectivo 'porque' como desencadenante de argumentación. Esta producción y comprensión argumentativa en niños pequeños ha sido denominada 'protoargumentación', en tanto se carece de ciertas operaciones consideradas específicas del argumentar (Eisenberg, 1987;Peronard, 1991;Crespo, 1995;Silvestri, 2001).…”

Section: Marco Teórico Generalunclassified

Estrategias argumentativas en niños pequeños: Un estudio a partir de las disputas durante el juego en contextos escolares

Migdalek¹,

Yãnez²,

Rosemberg³

2014

Rev. signos

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ResumenEn este trabajo se pone a prueba un sistema de categorías para analizar las estrategias argumentativas que despliegan niños en situaciones de juego en el contexto educativo. Se indaga si el sistema resulta adecuado para describir y evaluar las estrategias argumentativas de niños de 3, 4 y 5 años en el contexto del jardín de infantes. El estudio empírico se desarrolla a partir de la observación de interacciones de niños en situaciones naturales de juego en jardines de infantes de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires, Argentina. El estudio ha permitido concluir la validez del sistema para contextos institucionales. Asimismo, el análisis muestra que los niños producen mayormente expresiones de oposición argumentativa sin desplegar argumentos estructurados (razón-conclusión), lo que podría ser característico de una fase protoargumentativa, y que entre los niños de 5 años se observa un uso más recurrente del esquema argumentativo de apelación a la mayoría.Palabras Clave: Argumentación, juego, niños, oposición, puntos de vista. Estrategias argumentativas en niños pequeños:Un estudio a partir de las disputas durante el juego en contextos escolaresArgumentative strategies in young children: An study of disputes during play in school contexts

show abstract

The power of well-connected arguments: Early sensitivity to the connective because

Cited by 23 publications

References 24 publications

“Why Does Rain Fall?”: Children Prefer to Learn From an Informant Who Uses Noncircular Explanations

“Why Does Rain Fall?”: Children Prefer to Learn From an Informant Who Uses Noncircular Explanations

Group Membership Influences More Social Identification Than Social Learning or Overimitation in Children

Estrategias argumentativas en niños pequeños: Un estudio a partir de las disputas durante el juego en contextos escolares

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About