Developmental changes within the core of artifact concepts

Three experiments addressed the relative importance of original function and current function in artifact categorization. Subjects were asked to judge whether an artifact that was made for one purpose (e.g. making tea) and was currently being used for another purpose (e.g. watering flowers) was a teapot or a watering can. Experiment 1 replicated the finding by Hall (1995) (unpublished manuscript) that adults rely on the original function of an artifact over a current function in their kind judgments. Experiments 2 and 3 revealed that whereas the kind judgments of 6-year-olds, like those of adults, patterned with the original function, those of 4-year-olds did not. Four-year-olds were influenced by the order in which the functions were mentioned in the story. Further, in their justifications 6-year-olds and adults referred to the origin of the objects, whereas 4-year-olds virtually never did. We conclude that 6-year-olds have begun to organize their understanding of artifacts around the notion of original function, and that 4-year-olds have not. The data are discussed as they bear on children's understanding of the design stance (Dennett, D. C. (1987).

[1]  Ellin Kofsky Scholnick,et al.  Conceptual Development : Piaget's Legacy , 1999 .

[2]  S. Carey.  Conceptual Change in Childhood , 1985 .

[3]  Stella Vosniadou,et al.  Similarity and analogical reasoning: Similarity and Analogical Reasoning , 1989 .

[4]  R. Ackermann.  Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science , 1975 .

[5]  R. J. B..  The Child's Conception of the World , 1929, Nature.

[6]  Paul Bloom.  Intention, history, and artifact concepts , 1996, Cognition.

[7]  F. Keil.  Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development , 1989 .

[8]  M. Siegal,et al.  Children's understanding of biology and health , 1999 .

[9]  D Kelemen,et al.  Why are rocks pointy? Children's preference for teleological explanations of the natural world. , 1999, Developmental psychology.

[10]  D. H. Dodd,et al.  Early word meanings: perceptually or functionally based? , 1980, Child development.

[11]  L. Frank.  The Society for Research in Child Development , 1935 .

[12]  R. Giere.  Cognitive Models of Science , 1992 .

[13]  S. Carey,et al.  Like father, like son: young children's understanding of how and why offspring resemble their parents. , 1996, Child development.

[14]  Dedre Gentner,et al.  What looks like a jiggy but acts like a zimbo?: A study of early word meaning using artificial objects , 1978 .

[15]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  Object Shape, Object Function, and Object Name , 1998 .

[16]  James P. Byrnes,et al.  Perspectives on language and thought : interrelations in development , 1991 .

[17]  Barbara C. Malt,et al.  Do artifact concepts have cores , 1992 .

[18]  S. Carey,et al.  The Epigenesis of mind : essays on biology and cognition , 1991 .

[19]  S. Brison.  The Intentional Stance , 1989 .

[20]  D. K. Nelson,et al.  Principle-Based Inferences in Young Children's Categorization: Revisiting the Impact of Function on the Naming of Artifacts. , 1995 .

[21]  A. Leslie.  Mapping the mind: ToMM, ToBY, and Agency: Core architecture and domain specificity , 1994 .

[22]  F. Keil,et al.  On the development of biologically specific beliefs: the case of inheritance. , 1989, Child development.

[23]  Susan Carey,et al.  On the origin of causal understanding. , 1995 .

[24]  T. K. Au.  Developing An Intuitive Understanding of Substance Kinds , 1994, Cognitive Psychology.

[25]  S. Carey.  Knowledge Acquisition: Enrichment or Conceptual Change? , 1991 .

[26]  S. Gelman,et al.  Mapping the Mind: Domain Specificity In Cognition And Culture , 1994 .

[27]  Jean Piaget,et al.  The child's construction of quantities : conservation and atomism , 1974 .

[28]  Deborah Kelemen.  The nature and development of the teleological stance. , 1996 .

[29]  S. Carey,et al.  On differentiation: A case study of the development of the concepts of size, weight, and density , 1985, Cognition.

[30]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Analogical transfer in young children: Analogies as tools for communication and exposition , 1989 .

[31]  G. Hatano,et al.  Young children's recognition of commonalities between animals and plants. , 1996, Child development.

[32]  S. Gelman,et al.  Understanding natural cause: children's explanations of how objects and their properties originate. , 1991, Child development.

[33]  Deborah Kelemen,et al.  The scope of teleological thinking in preschool children , 1999, Cognition.

[34]  N. McCarrell,et al.  Form-function correspondences in children's inference. , 1995, Child development.

[35]  S. Carey,et al.  Constructing a coherent theory: Children's biological understanding of life and death. , 1999 .

[36]  John D. Coley,et al.  Perspectives on language and thought: Language and categorization: The acquisition of natural kind terms , 1991 .

[37]  Susan C. Johnson,et al.  Why dogs have puppies and cats have kittens: the role of birth in young children's understanding of biological origins. , 1997, Child development.

[38]  Z. Nadasdy,et al.  Taking the intentional stance at 12 months of age , 1995, Cognition.

[39]  H. Wellman,et al.  Cognitive development: foundational theories of core domains. , 1992, Annual review of psychology.

[40]  L. Rips.  Similarity, typicality, and categorization , 1989 .

[41]  F. Keil,et al.  On the development of biologically specific beliefs: the case of inheritance. , 1989, Child development.

[42]  A. Gopnik,et al.  The theory theory. , 1994 .

[43]  Frank C. Keil,et al.  The origins of an autonomous biology. , 1992 .