Effects of Familiarity with Category Members and Young Children’s Age on Inductive Inferences Within Natural Kinds

1757 Words4 Pages

Induction is an important cognitive ability in which inferences extend knowledge beyond the available information (Farrar, Raney, & Boyer, 1992). For instance, knowing an object belongs to a specific category can lead to beliefs that it shares additional properties with other category members. This can be crucial to learning and interacting with the world around us and can be considered one of the most basic functions of living creatures. Induction appears early in development (Sloutsky, Kloos, & Fisher, 2007). Preschool children have been shown to expect categories to promote induction and they use category membership to predict underlying similarities among objects – even when perceptual similarity would lead to a different prediction (Gelman, 1988). For example, a study conducted by Gelman and Markman with 3- and 4-year-olds, children were shown two objects, a tropical fish and a dolphin, and were taught a new fact about each that one breathes under water and the other pops up to breathe (Gelman, 1988). They were then shown a third object, a shark, and had to infer which of the facts about the first two objects would be applied to the new third object. However, the third object looked like the dolphin, but given the same category as the tropical fish. According to Bornstein & Arterberry (2010), categories are especially valuable in infancy and early childhood, when new objects, events, and people are encountered, because without the ability and proclivity to categorize, children would have to learn to respond anew to each novel entity they experience. Examining whether children value the same sample of characteristics as adults do when solving induction problems provides a window into how inductive abilities develop (Rhodes,... ... middle of paper ... ...ve Psychology, 20, 65-95. Gelman, S. A. & Markman, E. M. (1987). Young children’s inductions from natural kinds: The role of categories and appearance. Kelemen, D., Widdowson, D., Posner, T., Brown, A. L., & Calser, K. (2003). Teleo-function constraints on preschool children’s reasoning about living things. Developmental Science, 6, 329-345. Mervis, C. B. & Rosch, E. (1981). Categorization of natural objects. Annual Review of Psychology, 32, 89-115. Rhodes, M., Gelman, S. A., & Brickman, D. (2008). Developmental changes in the consideration of sample diversity in inductive reasoning. Journal of Cognition and Development, 9, 112-143. doi: 10.1080/15248370701836626 Sloutsky, V. M. & Fisher, A. V. (2004). Induction and categorization in young children: A similarity-based model. Journal of Experimental Psychology, 133, 166-188. doi: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.2.166

Open Document