Does the Public Know What Researchers Know? Perceived Task Difficulty Impacts Adults’ Intuitions About Children’s Early Word Learning

• In Event: Poster Session 14
  In Poster Session: PS 14 Topic - Language, Communication

Abstract

Constraints/principles, sociopragmatic, and domain-general theories propose varying cognitive and social processes underlying word learning. However, does adults’ understanding of early word learning align with central findings in language acquisition? Furthermore, does this understanding change with increasing experience with children and/or language instruction?
To answer these questions, Experiment 1 examined adults’ understanding of children’s early word learning. We hypothesized that regardless of expertise, adults would demonstrate lower accuracy on concepts derived from domain-general theories. This prediction was drawn from prior studies on metacognition of domain-general principles in memory (Kornell & Bjork, 2007, 2008). Participants, including the general public (N = 93, Mage = 34.69, SD = 10.36), undergraduates (N = 89, Mage = 19.92, SD = 1.56), parents (N = 88, Mage = 41.68, SD = 10.05), and Speech Language Pathologists (SLPs) (N = 82, Mage = 35.04, SD = 10.07), completed a survey about 11 concepts derived from constraints/principles (mutual exclusivity, whole object assumption, taxonomic bias, shape bias), sociopragmatic (looking, pointing, overheard speech, Cannister task), or domain-general theories (massed vs. spaced, cross-situational word learning, varied context). For example, when testing the mutual exclusivity assumption, participants were shown a familiar and a novel object and told: “Gabriel is a preschooler. Gabriel hears the word “wug”. Which one does Gabriel think is the “wug”?”. Results supported our prediction: Adults had accurate intuitions about all concepts, except those derived from domain-general theories (Figure 1). Chi-squared tests of independence revealed that informal (i.e., parents) and formal experience (i.e., SLPs) with children and language instruction affected response accuracy for learning from massed vs. spaced schedules and varied contexts, p < .05.
Why were adults less accurate on domain-general theory concepts? First, we assessed whether adults were aware of their inaccurate intuitions, and whether this might lead to interest in learning about the concept. Therefore, Experiment 2 investigated the relation between accuracy and self-report measures of confidence and interest. Results from 97 adults (Mage = 19.51, SD = 1.32) revealed that the relation between these measures did not differ notably by word learning concept. In Experiment 3, we recruited a sample of 96 adults (Mage = 20.14, SD = 0.18) to assess whether perceived difficulty of a task might explain adults’ intuitions. The overall mean difficulty rating was significantly greater for concepts derived from domain-general theories (M = 2.76, SD = 0.48) than constraints/principles (M = 2.12, SD = 0.65), p < .001, and sociopragmatic theories (M = 2.52, SD = 0.55), p < .001. Moreover, a series of Bonferroni-corrected (α = .003) independent samples t-tests showed that concepts derived from domain-general and sociopragmatic theories were rated as significantly more difficult when adults answered incorrectly (Table 1).
Taken together, the results highlight disconnects in knowledge between the cognitive development research community and the public. Specifically, perceived difficulty impacted adults’ reasoning about word learning processes. Because adults are critical in children’s language learning, efforts must be made to communicate scientific findings to the broader nonacademic community, emphasizing children’s ability to excel in the face of task difficulty.

Authors

• Melina Lauryn Knabe, University of Wisconsin - Madison
  Presenting Author

• Christina Schonberg, University of Wisconsin - Madison
  Non-Presenting Author

• Haley A Vlach, University of Wisconsin - Madison
  Non-Presenting Author