An explanatory heuristic gives rise to the belief that words are well suited for their referents

Cognition

Volumn 143, Issue , 2015, Pages 228-240

  Sutherland, Shelbie L ^a   Cimpian, Andrei ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

Author keywords

Conceptual development; Explanation; Heuristics; Inherence heuristic; Language; Nominal fit

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; ATTENTION; CHANCE SCALE; CHILD; COGNITION; COGNITIVE REFLECTION TEST; COMPREHENSION; CONTROLLED STUDY; COUNTERFACTUAL THINKING; CREATIVITY; FEMALE; FLUID INTELLIGENCE; HUMAN; INHERENCE HEURISTIC; INHERENCE LANGUAGE SCALE; INTELLIGENCE; INTUITION; LANGUAGE; MALE; MEMORY; MENTAL FUNCTION ASSESSMENT; MULTILINGUALISM; NOMENCLATURE; NOMINAL FIT BELIEF; PRIORITY JOURNAL; RESEARCH SUBJECT; THINKING; YOUNG ADULT; CONCEPT FORMATION; HEURISTICS; LEARNING; LINGUISTICS; PHYSIOLOGY; PRESCHOOL CHILD;

ADULT; CHILD; CHILD, PRESCHOOL; CONCEPT FORMATION; FEMALE; HEURISTICS; HUMANS; LANGUAGE; LEARNING; MALE; VOCABULARY; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84938096992     PISSN: 00100277     EISSN: 18737838     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2015.07.002     Document Type: Article

References (67)

1. Ball S.E., Simpson R.A. Shifts from nominal realism in grade school children as a function of participating in a naming task. The Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied 1977, 96:217-221.
2. Beck S.R., Robinson E.J., Carroll D.J., Apperly I.A. Children's thinking about counterfactuals and future hypotheticals as possibilities. Child Development 2006, 77(2):413-426.
3. Bialystok E. Words as things: Development of word concept by bilingual children. Studies in Second Language Acquisition 1987, 9(2):133-140.
4. Boroditsky L., Schmidt L.A., Phillips W. Sex, syntax, semantics. Language in mind: Advances in the study of language and thought 2003, 61-80. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA. D. Gentner, S. Goldin-Meadow (Eds.).
5. Brook J.S. A test of Piaget's theory of "nominal realism". Journal of Genetic Psychology 1970, 116:165-175.
6. Buresh J.S., Woodward A.L. Infants track action goals within and across agents. Cognition 2007, 104:287-314.
7. Byrt T., Bishop J., Carlin J.B. Bias, prevalence and kappa. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 1993, 46(5):423-429.
8. Cacioppo J.T., Petty R.E., Kao C.F. The efficient assessment of need for cognition. Journal of Personality Assessment 1984, 48:306-307.
9. Cimpian A., Markman E.M. Information learned from generic language becomes central to children's biological concepts: Evidence from their open-ended explanations. Cognition 2009, 113(1):14-25.
10. Cimpian A., Markman E.M. The generic/nongeneric distinction influences how children interpret new information about social others. Child Development 2011, 82(2):471-492.
11. Cimpian A., Park J.J. Tell me about pangolins! Evidence that children are motivated to learn about kinds. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 2014, 143(1):46-55.
12. Cimpian A., Salomon E. The inherence heuristic: An intuitive means of making sense of the world, and a potential precursor to psychological essentialism. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2014, 37(5):461-480.
13. Cimpian A., Salomon E. Refining and expanding the proposal of an inherence heuristic in human understanding. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2014, 37(5):506-527.
14. Cimpian A., Scott R.M. Children expect generic knowledge to be widely shared. Cognition 2012, 123(3):419-433.
15. Cimpian A. The inherence heuristic: Generating everyday explanations. Emerging trends in the social and behavioral sciences 2015, 1-15. John Wiley and Sons, Hoboken, NJ. R. Scott, S. Kosslyn (Eds.).
16. Cimpian A., Steinberg O.D. The inherence heuristic across development: Systematic differences between children's and adults' explanations for everyday facts. Cognitive Psychology 2014, 75:130-154.
17. Clark E.V. On the logic of contrast. Journal of Child Language 1988, 15:317-335.
18. Cummins J. Bilingualism and the development of metalinguistic awareness. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology 1978, 9(2):131-149.
19. De Regt H.W. Understanding and explanation: Living apart together?. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science 2013, 44:505-509.
20. Diesendruck G. The principles of conventionality and contrast in word learning: An empirical examination. Developmental Psychology 2005, 41(3):451-463.
21. Diesendruck G., Markson L. Children's assumption of the conventionality of culture. Child Development Perspectives 2011, 5:189-195.
22. Doherty M.J. Children's understanding of homonymy: Metalinguistic awareness and false belief. Journal of Child Language 2000, 27(2):367-392.
23. Evans J.St.B.T. The heuristic-analytic theory of reasoning: Extension and evaluation. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review 2006, 13:378-395.
24. Finucane M.L., Gullion C.M. Developing a tool for measuring the decision-making competence of older adults. Psychology and Aging 2010, 25(2):271-288.
25. Frederick S. Cognitive reflection and decision making. Journal of Economic Perspectives 2005, 19:25-42.
26. German T.P., Nichols S. Children's counterfactual inferences about long and short causal chains. Developmental Science 2003, 6(5):514-523.
27. Gough H.G. A creative personality scale for the Adjective Check List. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1979, 37:1398-1405.
28. Graham S.A., Stock H., Henderson A.M. Nineteen-month-olds' understanding of the conventionality of object labels versus desires. Infancy 2006, 9(3):341-350.
29. Harris P.L., German T., Mills P. Children's use of counterfactual thinking in causal reasoning. Cognition 1996, 61:233-259.
30. Hayes A.F. Introduction to mediation, moderation, and conditional process analysis 2013, The Guilford Press, New York.
31. Hempel C. Aspects of scientific explanation and other essays in the philosophy of science 1965, Free Press, New York.
32. Hu L., Bentler P.M. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Structural Equation Modeling 1999, 6(1):1-55.
33. Hussak, L. J., & Cimpian, A. (2014). Information about inherent features is highly accessible: Support for an inherence heuristic in explanation. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the Psychonomic Society. Long Beach, CA.
34. Hussak, L. J., & Cimpian, A. (in press). An early-emerging explanatory heuristic promotes support for the status quo. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology.
35. Ianco-Worrall A.D. Bilingualism and cognitive development. Child Development 1972, 43(4):1390-1400.
36. Kahneman D. Thinking, fast and slow 2011, Farrar, Straus, & Giroux, New York, NY.
37. Kahneman D., Tversky A. On the psychology of prediction. Psychological Review 1973, 80:237-251.
38. Karmiloff-Smith A., Grant J., Sims K., Jones M., Cuckle P. Rethinking metalinguistic awareness: Representing and accessing knowledge about what counts as a word. Cognition 1996, 58(2):197-219.
39. Keil F.C. Explanation and understanding. Annual Review of Psychology 2006, 57:227-254.
40. Kenny D.A., Kashy D.A. Analysis of the multitrait-multimethod matrix by confirmatory factor analysis. Psychological Bulletin 1992, 112(1):165-172.
41. Keysar B., Bly B. Intuitions of the transparency of idioms: Can one keep a secret by spilling the beans?. Journal of Memory and Language 1995, 34:89-109.
42. Kinzler K.D., Sullivan K. Is it about "pink" or about "girls"? The inherence heuristic across social and nonsocial domains. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2014, 37(5):494.
43. Kruglanski A.W., Webster D.W., Klem A. Motivated resistance and openness to persuasion in the presence or absence of prior information. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1993, 65:861-876.
44. Levenson H. Differentiating among internality, powerful others, and chance. Research with the locus of control construct 1981, Vol. 1:15-63. Academic Press, New York.
45. Lockhart K.L., Abrahams B., Osherson D.N. Children's understanding of uniformity in the environment. Child Development 1977, 48:1521-1531.
46. Lombrozo T. Explanation and abductive inference. Oxford handbook of thinking and reasoning 2012, 260-276. Oxford University Press, New York. K.J. Holyoak, R.G. Morrison (Eds.).
47. Markman E.M. Children's difficulty with word-referent differentiation. Child Development 1976, 47:742-750.
48. Marsh H.W. Confirmatory factor analyses of multitrait-multimethod data: Many problems and a few solutions. Applied Psychological Measurement 1989, 13(4):335-361.
49. Maurer D., Pathman T., Mondloch C.J. The shape of boubas: Sound-shape correspondences in toddlers and adults. Developmental Science 2006, 9(3):316-322.
50. McRae K., Cree G.S., Seidenberg M.S., McNorgan C. Semantic feature production norms for a large set of living and nonliving things. Behavior Research Methods 2005, 37:547-559.
51. McRae K., de Sa V.R., Seidenberg M.S. On the nature and scope of featural representations of word meaning. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 1997, 126(2):99-130.
52. Osherson D.N., Markman E.M. Language and the ability to evaluate contradictions and tautologies. Cognition 1975, 3:213-226.
53. Papandropoulou I., Sinclair H. What is a word? Experimental study of children's ideas on grammar. Human Development 1974, 17:241-258.
54. Piaget, J. (1967). The child's conception of the world (J. Tomlinson & A. Tomlinson, Trans.). Totowa, NJ: Littlefield, Adams & Co. (Original work published 1929).
55. Prasada S., Dillingham E.M. Principled and statistical connections in common sense conception. Cognition 2006, 99:73-112.
56. Raven J.C. Guide to the standard progressive matrices: Sets A, B, C, D and E 1960, H. K. Lewis & Co, London.
57. Rosenblum T., Pinker S.A. Word magic revisited: Monolingual and bilingual children's understanding of the word-object relationship. Child Development 1983, 54:773-780.
58. Rozin P., Markwith M., Ross B. The sympathetic magical law of similarity, nominal realism and neglect of negatives in response to negative labels. Psychological Science 1990, 1:383-384.
59. Rozin P., Millman L., Nemeroff C. Operation of the laws of sympathetic magic in disgust and other domains. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1986, 50:703-712.
60. Russell B. On denoting. Mind 1905, 14(56):479-493.
61. Salomon E., Cimpian A. The inherence heuristic as a source of essentialist thought. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin 2014, 40(10):1297-1315.
62. Shah A.K., Oppenheimer D.M. Heuristics made easy: An effort-reduction framework. Psychological Bulletin 2008, 134(2):207-222.
63. Stanovich K.E. Who is rational? Studies of individual differences in reasoning 1999, Lawrence Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ.
64. Stanovich K.E., West R.F. Reasoning independently of prior belief and individual differences in actively open-minded thinking. Journal of Educational Psychology 1997, 89:342-357.
65. Stanovich K.E., West R.F. Individual differences in reasoning: Implications for the rationality debate?. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2000, 23:645-665.
66. Tworek, C. M., & Cimpian, A. (2015). How do we decide what is right and what is wrong? The cognitive underpinnings of is-ought inferences. Paper presented at the sixteenth annual meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology. Long Beach, CA.
67. Vygotsky L.S. Thought and language 1962, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.