CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 125Categorization, perception, and languageLanguage Development and DisordersChild and Animal Learning Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 37 of the 39 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Children's Use of Generics in Inductive Inferences

Gelman, Susan A., Star, Jon R., Flukes, Jonathan·2002·Journal of Cognition and Development
DOI 10.1207/s15327647jcd0302_3
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

What conditions foster or constrain children's category-based induction? This study examined the role of language, specifically the scope of noun phrases used to convey novel property information. We focused on generic noun phrases, which are especially common in child-directed speech and have been argued to play an important role in the growth of category knowledge. In Study 1, 4-year-olds and adults were taught novel properties about familiar categories, using 1 of 3 types of wording: a generic noun phrase (e.g., "Bears like to eat ants"), a universally quantified noun phrase (e.g., "All bears like to eat ants"), or an indefinite plural noun phrase (e.g., "Some bears like to eat ants"). Study 2 was a follow-up study with adults using a more sensitive task. Results indicated sensitivity to type of wording among both preschoolers and adults, with "all" eliciting the most inferences, "some" eliciting the fewest inferences, and generics in between "all" and "some." However, children made fewer category-based inferences from generics than did adults. Together, these studies suggest that (a) preschool children as well as adults distinguish generics from both "all" and "some," and (b) age differences exist in the interpretation of generic noun phrases.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1207/s15327647jcd0302_3

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Show all 39 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Carlson, G. & Pelletier, F. J. (1995). The generic book. Chicago: Chicago University Press.
  2. Gelman, S. A. & Diesendruck, G. (1999). What's in a concept? Context, variability, and psychological essentialism. In I. E. Sigel (Ed.), Development of mental representation: Theories and applications (pp. 87-111). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  3. Goodman, N. (1973). Fact, fiction, and forecast (3rd ed.). Indianapolis, IN: Bobbs-Merrill.
  4. 10.1037//0012-1649.37.5.668 · DOI
  5. Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics (Vol. 1). New York: Cambridge University Press.
  6. 10.1037//0033-295X.97.2.185 · DOI

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 125

Related

Metadata

Authors
Gelman, S. A., Star, J. R., & Flukes, J.
ORCID
Venue
Journal of Cognition and Development
Publisher
Informa UK Limited
Published
2002-05
Volume
3
Issue
2
Pages
179-199
ISSN
  • 1524-8372 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-7647
DOI
10.1207/s15327647jcd0302_3
OpenAlex
W1987803247
Cited by
125
References
39
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 6 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 8
FWCI
21.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Cognition and Development (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Categorization, perception, and language
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Language Development and Disorders
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
Keywords
category-based induction, inductive reasoning, child-directed speech, quantifiers, universal quantification, existential quantification, preschool children, age differences, category knowledge, language and cognition

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