Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 453

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

ABSTRACT

·2008·Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development

Abstract

Preschoolers' questions may play an important role in cognitive development. When children encounter a problem with their current knowledge state (a gap in their knowledge, some ambiguity they do not know how to resolve, some inconsistency they have detected), asking a question allows them to get targeted information exactly when they need it. This information is available to them when they are particularly receptive to it, and because it comes as the result of their own disequilibrium, it may have depth of processing benefits. In that questions allow children to get information they need to move their knowledge structures closer to adult-like states, the ability to ask questions to gather needed information constitutes an efficient mechanism for cognitive development (referred to in this paper as the Information Requesting Mechanism [IRM]; this term is used because it includes question-asking and other information recruiting behaviors such as gestures, expressions, and vocalizations). However, the role of children's questions in their cognitive development has been largely overlooked. If questions are a force in cognitive development, the following must be true: (1) children must actually ask questions that gather information; (2) children must receive informative answers to their questions if they are able to be of use to cognitive development; (3) children must be motivated to get the information they request, rather than asking questions for other purposes such as attention; (4) the questions children ask must be relevant and of potential use to their cognitive development; (5) we must see evidence that children's questions help them in some way-that is, that they can ask questions for a purpose, and use the information they receive purposefully to successfully achieve some change of knowledge state. This monograph reports data on these points. Study 1 analyzed questions taken from four children's transcripts in the CHILDES database (age 1;2-5;1). This methodology allowed detailed, veridical analysis of every question asked by the children during their recording sessions. Results indicate that children ask many information-seeking questions and get informative answers. When they do not get an informative response, they keep asking; attention is not enough. Results also indicate that the content of children's questions parallel their conceptual advances, and shift within an exchange and over the course of development to reflect the learning process. So, these data suggest that the components of the IRM are in place and are used by children from very early in development, and the information they seek changes with time. Study 2 asked whether preverbal children who are not yet asking linguistic questions can recruit information via gestures, expressions, and vocalizations, in addition to further investigating the linguistic questions of older children. This study analyzed questions from a cross-sectional diary study, kept by 68 parents of their children's questions (aged 1;0-5;0). Also, this methodology allowed for data collection over a large number of children, a large range of situational contexts, and allows for the collection of low frequency, high-salience events. Results from Study 2 suggest that all of the components of the IRM are in place, and extends these findings down to younger, preverbal children who recruit information using gesture and vocalizations. Study 3 investigated the questions asked in one specific domain, biological knowledge, and examined the impact that different stimulus types have on children's questions. This study gathered data from 112 parent/child dyads (children aged 2, 3, and 4 years) walking through one of three zoos (one with real animals, one with drawings of animals, and one with three-dimensional replicas of animals), looking at the animals together. Results from this study also suggest that all of the components of the IRM are in place from the earliest age, further supporting the findings from Studies 1 and 2. In addition, while children still ask many nonbiological questions about the animals ("what is its name?"), biological information ("how do babies grow their bees?") is requested with much greater frequency in this study, although this need not necessarily be the case. Further, the nature of these questions suggests they may support the building of conceptual structures within the domain of biological knowledge, at a time just before the age when children make important conceptual changes in this area. Further, the type of stimulus materials used has an impact on the questions children ask; children are less likely to ask deep conceptual questions when looking at drawings or replicas of objects than when looking at the real thing. Finally, Study 4 examines the causal relation between children's questions and change in knowledge state by investigating whether or not children can ask questions in order to gain information that allows them to solve a problem. S

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1540-5834.2007.00412.x

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

See all 453

Metadata

Venue
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development
Published
2007-03
Volume
72
Issue
1
Pages
vii-ix
ISSN
  • 0037-976X (ISSN-L)
  • 1540-5834
OpenAlex
W98048161
Cited by
453
References
0
Type
conference abstract
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: ABSTRACT. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/j.1540-5834.2007.00412.x
The paper
ABSTRACT. (2008). Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-5834.2007.00412.x

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.