Jessica Sullivan

Grammatical morphology as a source of early number word meanings

Significance Languages vary in how they grammatically mark number (e.g., in nouns, verbs, and so forth). We test the effects of this variability on learning number words—for example, one, two, three—by investigating children learning Slovenian and Saudi Arabic, which have singular-plural marking, but also dual marking (for sets of two). We find that learning the dual is associated with faster learning of the meaning of two than in any previously studied language, even when accompanied by less experience with counting. We conclude that although exposure to counting is important to learning number word meanings, hearing number words used outside of these routines—in the quantificational structures of language—may also be highly important in early acquisition. How does cross-linguistic variation in linguistic structure affect children’s acquisition of early number word meanings? We tested this question by investigating number word learning in two unrelated languages that feature a tripartite singular-dual-plural distinction: Slovenian and Saudi Arabic. We found that learning dual morphology affects children’s acquisition of the number word two in both languages, relative to English. Children who knew the meaning of two were surprisingly frequent in the dual languages, relative to English. Furthermore, Slovenian children were faster to learn two than children learning English, despite being less-competent counters. Finally, in both Slovenian and Saudi Arabic, comprehension of the dual was correlated with knowledge of two and higher number words.

Inference and Association in Children's Early Numerical Estimation.

How do children map number words to the numerical magnitudes they represent? Recent work in adults has shown that two distinct mechanisms-structure mapping and associative mapping-connect number words to nonlinguistic numerical representations (Sullivan & Barner, ). This study investigated the development of number word mappings, and the roles of inference and association in childrens estimation. Fifty-eight 5- to 7-year-olds participated, and results showed that at both ages, children possess strong item-based associative mappings for numbers up to around six, but rely primarily on structure mapping-an inferential process-for larger quantities. These findings suggest that children rely primarily on an inferential mechanism to construct and deploy mappings between number words and large approximate magnitudes.

Active (not passive) spatial imagery primes temporal judgements

Previous research has shown that primes that induce particular spatial perspectives can influence temporal judgements. However, most studies have used priming stimuli that involve both spatial and motor language and imagery. Here we ask whether the motor content of these stimuli plays an important role in their ability to serve as effective primes. A total of 198 adult participants made temporal judgements after exposure to spatial primes involving varying levels of imagined effort. Spatial primes involving imagined motor actions, but not those involving equivalent passive motions through space, successfully primed decisions about time. This suggests that motor content, rather than spatial content alone, contributes to the priming effects that arise when people make temporal judgements after exposure to particular spatial perspectives.

Number words, quantifiers, and principles of word learning

How do children learn the meanings of words like many and five? Although much is known about the mechanisms that underlie childrens acquisition of nouns and verbs, considerably less is understood of how children begin to learn the meanings of words that refer to sets (e.g., number words and quantifiers). Here we argue that childrens acquisition of quantity expressions relies on learning mechanisms typically associated with learning content words. In particular, we argue that the Whole Object Assumption and the Principle of Contrast are special cases of more general principles that guide not just the acquisition of nouns and verbs, but also the acquisition and interpretation of number words and quantifiers. WIREs Cogni Sci 2011 2 639-645 DOI: 10.1002/wcs.140 For further resources related to this article, please visit the WIREs website.

Does Grammatical Structure Accelerate Number Word Learning? Evidence from Learners of Dual and Non-Dual Dialects of Slovenian.

How does linguistic structure affect children’s acquisition of early number word meanings? Previous studies have tested this question by comparing how children learning languages with different grammatical representations of number learn the meanings of labels for small numbers, like 1, 2, and 3. For example, children who acquire a language with singular-plural marking, like English, are faster to learn the word for 1 than children learning a language that lacks the singular-plural distinction, perhaps because the word for 1 is always used in singular contexts, highlighting its meaning. These studies are problematic, however, because reported differences in number word learning may be due to unmeasured cross-cultural differences rather than specific linguistic differences. To address this problem, we investigated number word learning in four groups of children from a single culture who spoke different dialects of the same language that differed chiefly with respect to how they grammatically mark number. We found that learning a dialect which features “dual” morphology (marking of pairs) accelerated children’s acquisition of the number word two relative to learning a “non-dual” dialect of the same language.

Intensive Math Training Does not Affect Approximate Number Acuity: Evidence From a Three-Year Longitudinal Curriculum Intervention

Does nonverbal, approximate number acuity predict mathematics performance? Some studies report a correlation between acuity of representations in the Approximate Number System (ANS) and early math achievement, while others do not. Few previous reports have addressed (1) whether reported correlations remain when other domain general capacities are considered, and (2) whether such correlations are causal. In the present study, we addressed both questions using a large (N = 204) 3-year longitudinal dataset from a successful math intervention, which included a wide array of non-numerical cognitive tasks. While we replicated past work finding correlations between approximate number acuity and math success, these correlations were very small when other domain-general capacities were considered. Also, we found no evidence that changes to math performance induced changes to approximate number acuity, militating against one class of causal accounts.

Backlash against gender stereotype-violating preschool children

While there is substantial evidence that adults who violate gender stereotypes often face backlash (i.e. social and economic penalties), less is known about the nature of gender stereotypes for young children, and the penalties that children may face for violating them. We conducted three experiments, with over 2000 adults from the US, to better understand the content and consequences of adults’ gender stereotypes for young children. In Experiment 1, we tested which characteristics adults (N = 635) believed to be descriptive (i.e. typical), prescriptive (i.e. required), and proscriptive (i.e. forbidden) for preschool-aged boys and girls. Using the characteristics that were rated in Experiment 1, we then constructed vignettes that were either ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’, and manipulated whether the vignettes were said to describe a boy or a girl. Experiment 2 (N = 697) revealed that adults rated stereotype-violating children as less likeable than their stereotype-conforming peers, and that this difference was more robust for boys than girls. Experiment 3 (N = 731) was a direct replication of Experiment 2, and revealed converging evidence of backlash against stereotype-violating children. In sum, our results suggest that even young children encounter backlash from adults for stereotype violations, and that these effects may be strongest for boys.

The Primacy Effect in Impression Formation: Some Replications and Extensions

Individuals described as “fun, witty, and vicious” are typically rated more favorably than those described as “vicious, witty, and fun” despite the semantic equivalence of these statements. This is known as the primacy effect in impression formation. We tested whether these effects emerge from pragmatic inferences about communicative intentions (e.g., that communicators should relay the most important information first). Participants heard a list of descriptors, with the most positive adjective listed either first or last; they also learned either that (a) the list was compiled by a human (licensing the inference that the most important information should be conveyed first) or (b) randomly ordered by a computer (thus blocking such an inference). Across five experiments (total N = 2,882), we found support for a small primacy effect in impression formation, but found no evidence of a pragmatic explanation for primacy effects.

The Dark Triad and framing effects predict selfish behavior in a one-shot Prisoner’s Dilemma

What causes us to display selfish behaviors? We explored the extent to which Dark Triad traits (sub-clinical psychopathy, narcissism, and Machiavellianism) support a selfish behavioral strategy. We related performance on a hypothetical Prisoner’s Dilemma (an economic game that simulates a two-person social dilemma) to participants’ (N = 1400) Dark Triad scores. Because contextual factors also impact selfish behaviors, we tested how framing (gain vs. loss; and social vs. nonsocial) shaped performance in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Participants with high Dark Triad scores were more likely to behave selfishly in the Prisoner’s Dilemma. Participants were also most likely to betray their partner in loss-framed and non-socially framed contexts. These effects did not interact with Dark Triad scores. Our data are consistent with the view that seemingly negative personality traits (like those associated with the Dark Triad traits) that persist in the population may serve as evolutionarily adaptive behavioral strategies.

Most Preschoolers Don’t Know Most

ABSTRACT Recently, researchers interested in the nature and origins of semantic representations have investigated an especially informative case study: The acquisition of the word most—a quantifier which by all accounts demands a sophisticated second-order logic, and which therefore poses an interesting challenge to theories of language acquisition. According to some reports, children acquire most as early as three years of age, suggesting that it does not draw on cardinal representations of quantity (contrary to some formal accounts), since adult-like knowledge of counting emerges later in development. Other studies, however, have provided evidence that children acquire most much later—possibly by the age of 6 or 7—thereby drawing this logic into question. Here we explore this issue by conducting a series of experiments that probed children’s knowledge of most in different ways. We conclude that children do not acquire an adult-like meaning for most until very late in development—around the age of 6—and that certain behaviors which appear consistent with earlier knowledge are better explained by children’s well-attested bias to select larger sets (a “more” bias), especially when tested with unfamiliar words.