Hierarchical categorization by bilingual Latino children: does a basic-level bias exist?

Valerie Malabonga, Robert Pasnak
{"title":"Hierarchical categorization by bilingual Latino children: does a basic-level bias exist?","authors":"Valerie Malabonga,&nbsp;Robert Pasnak","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Research has shown that children classify most easily at the basic level where objects in the same category look similar enough to each other to be grouped together but are distinct enough from objects in other categories to be discriminated (e.g., animal/bird/duck). In this article, the authors report on 2 experiments they conducted to determine whether children maintain this basic category bias when the perceptual similarity of stimuli at different hierarchical levels is equalized. Pictures within and across 3 hierarchical levels were made perceptually equivalent and shown to 71 Latino children who were bilingual in Spanish and English. In Experiment 1, the pictures used as exemplars could be categorized on any of the 3 hierarchical levels. In Experiment 2, example pictures unambiguously defined the level of categorization that would be accurate, and linguistic cues were given that might assist in the selection of the correct category. In both experiments, the children sorted pictures from all 3 levels equally well, but they found it harder to justify their sorting of superordinate pictures. English competence predicted sorting on the more ambiguous sorting task in Experiment 1; and English competence predicted verbal justifications in both experiments, even though the experiments were conducted in Spanish. Competence in Spanish or English was an equally good predictor of sorting in the better defined sorting task in Experiment 2. These findings indicate that a superordinate level deficiency remains after perceptual differences are eliminated and that the deficiency is cognitive in nature. Differences in the performances of children who differed in bilingualism support the hypothesis that a threshold of proficiency in both languages is an important determinant of the effect of bilingualism on categorization.</p>","PeriodicalId":77145,"journal":{"name":"Genetic, social, and general psychology monographs","volume":"128 4","pages":"409-41"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2002-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genetic, social, and general psychology monographs","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Research has shown that children classify most easily at the basic level where objects in the same category look similar enough to each other to be grouped together but are distinct enough from objects in other categories to be discriminated (e.g., animal/bird/duck). In this article, the authors report on 2 experiments they conducted to determine whether children maintain this basic category bias when the perceptual similarity of stimuli at different hierarchical levels is equalized. Pictures within and across 3 hierarchical levels were made perceptually equivalent and shown to 71 Latino children who were bilingual in Spanish and English. In Experiment 1, the pictures used as exemplars could be categorized on any of the 3 hierarchical levels. In Experiment 2, example pictures unambiguously defined the level of categorization that would be accurate, and linguistic cues were given that might assist in the selection of the correct category. In both experiments, the children sorted pictures from all 3 levels equally well, but they found it harder to justify their sorting of superordinate pictures. English competence predicted sorting on the more ambiguous sorting task in Experiment 1; and English competence predicted verbal justifications in both experiments, even though the experiments were conducted in Spanish. Competence in Spanish or English was an equally good predictor of sorting in the better defined sorting task in Experiment 2. These findings indicate that a superordinate level deficiency remains after perceptual differences are eliminated and that the deficiency is cognitive in nature. Differences in the performances of children who differed in bilingualism support the hypothesis that a threshold of proficiency in both languages is an important determinant of the effect of bilingualism on categorization.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
双语拉丁裔儿童的等级分类:是否存在基本水平的偏见?
研究表明,儿童最容易在基本水平上进行分类,同一类别的物体彼此看起来足够相似,可以归类在一起,但与其他类别的物体足够不同,可以区分(例如,动物/鸟/鸭子)。在这篇文章中,作者报告了他们进行的两个实验,以确定当不同层次刺激的感知相似性相等时,儿童是否保持这种基本类别偏见。三个层次内和层次间的图片在感知上是相等的,并展示给71名西班牙语和英语双语的拉丁裔儿童。在实验1中,作为范例的图片可以在三个层次中的任何一个层次上进行分类。在实验2中,示例图片明确地定义了准确的分类水平,并给出了可能有助于选择正确类别的语言线索。在这两个实验中,孩子们对所有三个级别的图片都分类得很好,但他们发现很难证明自己对高级图片的分类是正确的。在实验1中,英语能力对较为模糊的排序任务有预测作用;在这两个实验中,英语能力预测了口头辩护,尽管实验是用西班牙语进行的。在实验2中,西班牙语或英语的能力同样能很好地预测排序能力。这些发现表明,在消除知觉差异后,仍然存在上级水平缺陷,并且这种缺陷本质上是认知的。不同双语儿童的表现差异支持了两种语言熟练程度阈值是双语对分类影响的重要决定因素这一假设。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Psychologists versus psychologists: evaluating the claims of psychologists who publicly criticize their profession. Creativity, intelligence, and personality: a critical review of the scattered literature. Using epistemic ratios to evaluate hypotheses: an imprecision penalty for imprecise hypotheses. Measuring the value of nonwage employee benefits: building a model of the relation between benefit satisfaction and value. The cognition of deception: the role of executive processes in producing lies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1