Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-m6dg7 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T04:28:40.723Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The development of children's knowledge structures: events, slots, and taxonomies*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

Marie A. Sell
Marie A. Sell*
Affiliation:
Memphis State University
*
Department of Psychology, Memphis State University, Memphis, TN 38152, USA.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Seventeen preschool (age range 2;10–3;6), 26 kindergarten (age range 5;5–6;7), and 26 fourth-grade (age range 9;5–10;5) children's knowledge structures were examined with a word association task and a match-to-sample picture task to determine whether or not children used slot-filler categories as a mediating structure between event-based and taxonomic knowledge structures, as proposed by Nelson (1985, 1986). In general, preschool children were able to provide event-based, but not slot-filler or taxonomic, relations; kindergarten children were able to provide event-based or slot-filler relations, but very few taxonomic relations; and fourth-grade children were able to provide all three relations. These findings support Nelson's hypothesis that taxonomic knowledge structures are derived from event-based knowledge structures with the aid of slot-filler categories.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Child Language , Volume 19 , Issue 3 , October 1992 , pp. 659 - 676
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1992

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

This research was partly supported by an NICHHD Training Grant (No. HD07255) awarded to the University of Kansas, Bureau of Child Research. Preparation of this manuscript was supported by a Center of Excellence Grant awarded to the Department of Psychology at Memphis State University by the State of Tennessee. I wish to thank Susan Kemper and Robert Cohen for their comments and suggestions on earlier versions of this manuscript.

References

REFERENCES

Anglin, J. M. (1977). Word, object, and conceptual development. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
Bruning, J. L. & Kintz, B. L. (1977). Computational handbook of statistics. (Second edn.) Glenview, IL: Scott, Foresman.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1983). Meanings and concepts. In Mussen, P. H. (ed.), Carmichael's manual of child psychology, Vol. 3. Cognitive development. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1987). The principle of contrast: a constraint on language acquisition. In MacWhinney, B. (ed.), The mechanisms of language acquisition. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Clark, E. V. (1988). On the logic of contrast. Journal of Child Language 15, 317–35.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Collins, A. M. & Quillian, M. R. (1969). Retrieval time from semantic memory. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 8, 240–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dunn, L. M. & Dunn, L. M. (1981). Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test – Revised. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service.Google Scholar
Fleiss, J. L. (1981). Statistical methods for rates and proportions. New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
Gathercole, V. C. (1987). The contrastive hypothesis for the acquisition of word meaning: a reconsideration of the theory. Journal of Child Language 14, 493–531.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gathercole, V. C. (1989). Contrast: a semantic constraint? Journal of Child Language 16, 685–702.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kyratzis, A., Lucariello, J. & Nelson, K. (1988). Complementary, slot-filler, and taxonomic relations as knowledge organizers for young children. Unpublished manuscript. City University of New York Graduate Center, New York.Google Scholar
Lucariello, J. & Nelson, K. (1985). Slot-filler categories as memory organizers for young children. Developmental Psychology 21, 272–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lucariello, J. & Rifkin, A. (1986). Event representations as the basis for categorical knowledge. In Nelson, K. (ed.), Event knowledge: structure and function in development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. (1984). The acquisition and hierarchical organization of categories by children. In Sophian, C. (ed.), Origins of cognitive skills. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Markman, E. M. & Hutchinson, J. E. (1984). Children's sensitivity to constraints on word meaning: taxonomic versus thematic relations. Cognitive Psychology 16, 1–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. (1985). Making sense: the acquisition of shared meaning. Orlando: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (ed.), (1986). Event knowledge: structure and function in development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Nelson, K. (1988 a). Constraints on word learning? Cognitive Development 3, 221–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. (1988 b). Where do taxonomic categories come from? Human Development 31, 3–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nelson, K. & Gruendel, J. M. (1981). Generalized event representations: basic building blocks of cognitive development. In Lamb, M. E. & Brown, A. L. (eds), Advances in developmental psychology, Vol. 1. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Newman, M. A. & Bailey, B. E. (1971). A compilation of preschoolers' frequency word counts. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service, No. ED 074 083).Google Scholar
Rosch, E. (1973). On the internal structure of perceptual and semantic categories. In Moore, T. E. (ed.), Cognitive development and the acquisition of language. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M. & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology 8, 382–439.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schank, R. & Abelson, R. (1977). Scripts, plans, goals and understanding. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar