学龄前儿童对功能性隐喻的理解。

Q1 Social Sciences Open Mind Pub Date : 2024-07-19 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.1162/opmi_a_00152
Rebecca Zhu, Mariel K Goddu, Lily Zihui Zhu, Alison Gopnik
{"title":"学龄前儿童对功能性隐喻的理解。","authors":"Rebecca Zhu, Mariel K Goddu, Lily Zihui Zhu, Alison Gopnik","doi":"10.1162/opmi_a_00152","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Previous work suggests that preschoolers often misunderstand metaphors. However, some recent studies demonstrate that preschoolers can represent abstract relations, suggesting that the cognitive foundations of metaphor comprehension may develop earlier than previously believed. The present experiments used novel paradigms to explore whether preschoolers (<i>N</i> = 200; 4-5 years; 100 males, 100 females; predominantly White) can understand metaphors based on abstract, functional similarities. In Experiment 1, preschoolers and adults (<i>N</i> = 64; 18-41 years; 25 males, 39 females; predominantly White) rated functional metaphors (e.g., \"Roofs are hats\"; \"Tires are shoes\") as \"smarter\" than nonsense statements (e.g., \"Boats are skirts\"; \"Pennies are sunglasses\") in a metalinguistic judgment task (<i>d</i> = .42 in preschoolers; <i>d</i> = 3.06 in adults). In Experiment 2, preschoolers preferred functional explanations (e.g., \"Both keep you dry\") over perceptual explanations (e.g., \"Both have pointy tops\") when interpreting functional metaphors (e.g., \"Roofs are hats\") (<i>d</i> = .99). In Experiment 3, preschoolers preferred functional metaphors (e.g., \"Roofs are hats\") over nonsense statements (e.g., \"Roofs are scissors\") when prompted to select the \"better\" utterance (<i>d</i> = 1.25). Moreover, over a quarter of preschoolers in Experiment 1 and half of preschoolers in Experiment 3 explicitly articulated functional similarities when justifying their responses, and the performance of these subsets of children drove the success of the entire sample in both experiments. These findings demonstrate that preschoolers can understand metaphors based on abstract, functional similarities.</p>","PeriodicalId":32558,"journal":{"name":"Open Mind","volume":"8 ","pages":"924-949"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11285420/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preschoolers' Comprehension of Functional Metaphors.\",\"authors\":\"Rebecca Zhu, Mariel K Goddu, Lily Zihui Zhu, Alison Gopnik\",\"doi\":\"10.1162/opmi_a_00152\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Previous work suggests that preschoolers often misunderstand metaphors. However, some recent studies demonstrate that preschoolers can represent abstract relations, suggesting that the cognitive foundations of metaphor comprehension may develop earlier than previously believed. The present experiments used novel paradigms to explore whether preschoolers (<i>N</i> = 200; 4-5 years; 100 males, 100 females; predominantly White) can understand metaphors based on abstract, functional similarities. In Experiment 1, preschoolers and adults (<i>N</i> = 64; 18-41 years; 25 males, 39 females; predominantly White) rated functional metaphors (e.g., \\\"Roofs are hats\\\"; \\\"Tires are shoes\\\") as \\\"smarter\\\" than nonsense statements (e.g., \\\"Boats are skirts\\\"; \\\"Pennies are sunglasses\\\") in a metalinguistic judgment task (<i>d</i> = .42 in preschoolers; <i>d</i> = 3.06 in adults). In Experiment 2, preschoolers preferred functional explanations (e.g., \\\"Both keep you dry\\\") over perceptual explanations (e.g., \\\"Both have pointy tops\\\") when interpreting functional metaphors (e.g., \\\"Roofs are hats\\\") (<i>d</i> = .99). In Experiment 3, preschoolers preferred functional metaphors (e.g., \\\"Roofs are hats\\\") over nonsense statements (e.g., \\\"Roofs are scissors\\\") when prompted to select the \\\"better\\\" utterance (<i>d</i> = 1.25). Moreover, over a quarter of preschoolers in Experiment 1 and half of preschoolers in Experiment 3 explicitly articulated functional similarities when justifying their responses, and the performance of these subsets of children drove the success of the entire sample in both experiments. These findings demonstrate that preschoolers can understand metaphors based on abstract, functional similarities.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":32558,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Open Mind\",\"volume\":\"8 \",\"pages\":\"924-949\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11285420/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Open Mind\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00152\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Mind","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1162/opmi_a_00152","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

以往的研究表明,学龄前儿童常常误解隐喻。然而,最近的一些研究表明,学龄前儿童可以表现抽象关系,这表明隐喻理解的认知基础可能比以前认为的发展得更早。本实验采用新颖的范式来探讨学龄前儿童(人数=200;4-5 岁;男性 100 人,女性 100 人;以白人为主)能否理解基于抽象功能相似性的隐喻。在实验 1 中,学龄前儿童和成人(人数 = 64;18-41 岁;25 名男性,39 名女性;主要为白人)在金属语言判断任务中将功能性隐喻(如 "屋顶是帽子";"轮胎是鞋子")评为比无意义陈述(如 "船是裙子";"便士是太阳镜")"更聪明"(学龄前儿童的 d = 0.42;成人的 d = 3.06)。在实验 2 中,学龄前儿童在解释功能性隐喻(如 "屋顶是帽子")时,更倾向于功能性解释(如 "都能保持干燥"),而不是知觉性解释(如 "都有尖尖的顶")(d = 0.99)。在实验 3 中,当要求学前儿童选择 "更好 "的语句时,他们更喜欢功能性隐喻(如 "屋顶是帽子"),而不是无意义的语句(如 "屋顶是剪刀")(d = 1.25)。此外,实验 1 中超过四分之一的学龄前儿童和实验 3 中一半的学龄前儿童在解释他们的回答时明确阐述了功能相似性,这些儿童的表现推动了整个样本在这两个实验中的成功。这些研究结果表明,学龄前儿童能够根据抽象的功能相似性理解隐喻。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Preschoolers' Comprehension of Functional Metaphors.

Previous work suggests that preschoolers often misunderstand metaphors. However, some recent studies demonstrate that preschoolers can represent abstract relations, suggesting that the cognitive foundations of metaphor comprehension may develop earlier than previously believed. The present experiments used novel paradigms to explore whether preschoolers (N = 200; 4-5 years; 100 males, 100 females; predominantly White) can understand metaphors based on abstract, functional similarities. In Experiment 1, preschoolers and adults (N = 64; 18-41 years; 25 males, 39 females; predominantly White) rated functional metaphors (e.g., "Roofs are hats"; "Tires are shoes") as "smarter" than nonsense statements (e.g., "Boats are skirts"; "Pennies are sunglasses") in a metalinguistic judgment task (d = .42 in preschoolers; d = 3.06 in adults). In Experiment 2, preschoolers preferred functional explanations (e.g., "Both keep you dry") over perceptual explanations (e.g., "Both have pointy tops") when interpreting functional metaphors (e.g., "Roofs are hats") (d = .99). In Experiment 3, preschoolers preferred functional metaphors (e.g., "Roofs are hats") over nonsense statements (e.g., "Roofs are scissors") when prompted to select the "better" utterance (d = 1.25). Moreover, over a quarter of preschoolers in Experiment 1 and half of preschoolers in Experiment 3 explicitly articulated functional similarities when justifying their responses, and the performance of these subsets of children drove the success of the entire sample in both experiments. These findings demonstrate that preschoolers can understand metaphors based on abstract, functional similarities.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Open Mind
Open Mind Social Sciences-Linguistics and Language
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
15
审稿时长
53 weeks
期刊最新文献
Approximating Human-Level 3D Visual Inferences With Deep Neural Networks. Prosodic Cues Support Inferences About the Question's Pedagogical Intent. The Double Standard of Ownership. Combination and Differentiation Theories of Categorization: A Comparison Using Participants' Categorization Descriptions. Investigating Sensitivity to Shared Information and Personal Experience in Children's Use of Majority Information.
×
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