The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Grammatical categories and the development of classification preferences: a comparative approach
Abstract
Introduction The defining characteristic of the human species is its culture-bearing capacity whereby very similar biological organisms develop and sustain extraordinarily diverse behavioral repertoires. Research on human behavior, then, must necessarily concern itself with the scope and significance of this diversity and the process of its development in childhood. However, contemporary psychological research often assumes instead a homogeneity of repertoire and of underlying psychological function - coupled with a concomitant assimilation of the psychological to the biological - and neglects the process of culture acquisition. Theories and methods developed from such a perspective neither incline their proponents to developmentally oriented comparative research nor provide a set of concepts and tools adequate to undertake it. The reality of cultural diversity requires us to adopt a comparative perspective from the beginning as part of a coherent effort to account for the actual range of human psychological functioning and the process of its formation. Such a coherent effort demands more than simply testing whether our local findings generalize to other cultures or looking for a specific, naturally occurring equivalent for some odd manipulation we cannot perform within our own culture for one reason or another. Rather, it requires taking seriously the proposal that the human developmental process is designed to support diversity in behavioral outcome and that psychological research programs must take account of this from the outset if they are to produce adequate methods and theories.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Can language restructure cognition? The case for space
Majid, A., Bowerman, M., Kita, S., Haun, D. B. M., & Levinson, S. C. (2004) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2004.01.003 · Cited by 872
The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis
(2009) · Oxford University Press eBooks · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.001.0001 · Cited by 639
The Cartography of Syntactic Structures
Cinque, G., & Rizzi, L. (2012) · The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Analysis · doi:10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199544004.013.0003 · Cited by 639
Linguistically Modulated Perception and Cognition: The Label-Feedback Hypothesis
Lupyan, G. (2012) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2012.00054 · Cited by 512
Laitin, D. D. (2000) · American Journal of Political Science · doi:10.2307/2669300 · Cited by 258
Metadata
- Authors
- Lucy, J. A., & Gaskins, S.
- Venue
- Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development
- Publisher
- Cambridge University Press
- Published
- 2001-01-11
- Pages
- 257-283
- OpenAlex
- W157302858
- Cited by
- 262
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 29.48
- Type
- book chapter
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Grammatical categories and the development of classification preferences: a comparative approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1017/cbo9780511620669.011
- The paper
- Lucy, J. A., & Gaskins, S. (2001). Grammatical categories and the development of classification preferences: a comparative approach. Language Acquisition and Conceptual Development. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511620669.011
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.