Developmental Differences in the Construction of Concepts by Children from 3 to 14-Year-Olds: Perception, Language and Instruction

Authors: Mehmet Ozcan

Abstract:

This study was designed to investigate the relationship between language and children’s construction of the concept of objects, actions, and states. Participants of this study are 120 children whose ages range from 3 to 14 years. Ten children participated from each age group and 10 adults participated as normative group. Data were collected using 28 words which were identified and grouped according to the purpose of this study. Participants were asked the question “What is x?’ for each word in a reserved room. The audio recorded data were transcribed and coded. The data were analyzed primarily qualitatively but quantitatively as well to support qualitative findings. The findings reveal that younger children rely more on their perceptual experience and linguistic input while 7-year-olds and older ones rely more on instructional language in the construction of the concepts related to objects, actions and states. Adults differ from all age groups with their usage of metaphors to refer to objects. It has been noted that linguistic, perceptual and instructional experiences work in an interwoven way but each one seems to be dominant at certain ages.

Keywords: Cognition, concept construction, first language acquisition, language, thought.

Digital Object Identifier (DOI): doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1477937

References:

[1] J. Piaget, The construction of reality in the child. Oxon: Routledge, 1954.
[2] S. A. Gelman, “Learning from Others: Children’s Construction of Concepts,” Annual Review of Psychology, 60, pp. 115-140, 2009.
[3] T. Regier, P. Kay, A. Gilbert, & R. Ivry, “Language and thought: Which side are you on anyway?” in B. Malt & P. Wolff (Eds.), Words and the world: How words capture human experience. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010, pp. 165-182.
[4] J. G. Bremner, Infancy. Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.
[5] D. F. Bjorklund, Children’s thinking: cognitive development and individual differences. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2012.
[6] E. S. Spelke, P. Vishton, & C. von Hofsten, “Object perception, object-directed action, and physical knowledge in infancy,” in M. S. Gazzaniga (Ed.), The cognitive neurosciences. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 1995, pp. 165-179.
[7] N. Chomsky, Aspects of the theory of syntax. Cambridge: MIT Press, 1965.
[8] J. Piaget, Play, dreams, and imitation in childhood. New York: Norton, 1962.
[9] S. Choi, & M. Bowerman, “Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: The influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns,” Cognition, 41, pp. 83-121, 1991.
[10] S. C. Levinson, “From outer to inner space:linguistic categories and non-linguistic thinking,” in J. Nuyts & E. Pederson (Eds). Language culture and cognition 1: Language and conceptualization, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1998, pp. 13-45.
[11] S. Pauen, & B. Trauble, “How 7-month-olds interpret ambiguous motion events: Category-based reasoning in infancy,” Cognitive Psychology, 59, pp. 275–295, 2009.
[12] S. Vosniadou, “Children and metaphors,” Child development, 58(3), pp. 870-885, 1997.
[13] A. Aksu-Koç, “Simultaneity in children’s narratives: The development of cohesion in discourse,” Studies in Turkish Linguistics. Ankara: METU, 1988, pp. 55-78.
[14] M. Ozcan, “Developmental Differences in the Use of Tense Aspect Modality in Narratives,” Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 32, pp. 221-231, 2007.
[15] S. Kalkan, E. Şahin & G. Üçoluk, “Conceptualizing verbs, nouns and adjectives,” Retrieved from: http://www.acatproject.eu/uploads/download/symposium_2013/Kalkan.pdf, in press.
[16] E. Rosch, C. B. Mervis, W. D. Gray, D. M. Johnson & P. Boyes-Braem, Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8, pp. 382-439, 1976.
[17] F. Xu, T. Kushnir, & J. B. Benson, (Vol. Eds.) Rational constructivism in cognitive development. Amsterdam: Academic Press. Vol. 43, 2012.
[18] S. Asch, & H. Nerlove, “The development of double function terms in children: An exploration study,” in B. Kaplan & S. Wapner (Eds.), Perspectives in psychological theory, New York: International University Press, 1960, pp. 47- 60.
[19] M. S. Cometa, & M. E. Eson, “Logical operations and metaphor interpretations: A Piagetian model,” Child Development, 49, pp. 649-659, 1978.
[20] R. E. Reynolds, & A. Ortony, “Some issues in the measurement of children's comprehension of metaphorical language,” Child Development, 51(4), pp. 1110-1119, 1980.
[21] N. Carriedo, A. Corral, P. R. Montoro, L. Herrero, P. Ballestrino & I. Sebastián, “The Development of Metaphor Comprehension and Its Relationship with Relational Verbal Reasoning and Executive Function,” PLoS ONE, 11(3), pp. 1-20. e0150289. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0150289, 2016.