Dropping the Other U: An Alternative Approach to U-Shaped Developmental Functions

The aim of this article is to introduce readers to an alternative way of applying U-shaped functions to understand development, especially cognitive development. In classical developmental applications, age is the abscissa; that is, in the fundamental equation B = f(A), some behavioral variable (B) plots as a U-shaped or inverted U-shaped function of chronological age across some age range. Although a U-shaped trend is always a surprising outcome,examples are reasonably thick on the ground—including infant face perception (Cashon & Cohen, 2004), symbolic gestures (Namy, Campbell, & Tomasello, 2004), and motor coordination and language (Gershkoff-Stowe & Thelen, 2004). These nonmonotonic trends are sufficiently numerous that some—notably, Thelen and associates (e.g., Thelen, Schöner, Scheier, & Smith, 2001; Thelen & Smith, 1994)—contend that a theoretical reorientation along dynamical systems lines is in order. There is a second “behavioral U” that figures in adult experimental psychology. It remains largely unknown in developmental work, but we could, I think, employ it to great advantage in research and theory. This article describes the other family of behavioral Us, shows how to apply it in developmental work, and sketches what can be learned from such applications. JOURNAL OF COGNITION AND DEVELOPMENT, 5(1), 81–88 Copyright © 2004, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

[1]  V F Reyna,et al.  Fuzzy-trace theory and children's false memories. , 1998, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[2]  W. Köhler The Mentality of Apes. , 2018, Nature.

[3]  K. Spence The differential response in animals to stimuli varying within a single dimension. , 1937 .

[4]  V. Reyna,et al.  Development of Gist versus Verbatim Memory in Sentence Recognition: Effects of Lexical Familiarity, Semantic Content, Encoding Instructions, and Retention Interval. , 1994 .

[5]  Charles J. Brainerd,et al.  FALSE-RECOGNITION REVERSAL: WHEN SIMILARITY IS DISTINCTIVE , 1995 .

[6]  John G. Seamon,et al.  Repetition can have similar or different effects on accurate and false recognition , 2002 .

[7]  S C Draine,et al.  Replicable unconscious semantic priming. , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[8]  John D. Bransford,et al.  The abstraction of linguistic ideas , 1971 .

[9]  D. G. Payne,et al.  Dual-retrieval processes in free and associative recall. , 2002 .

[10]  Walter Kintsch,et al.  Sentence memory: A theoretical analysis ☆ , 1990 .

[11]  Barbara Anne Dosher,et al.  Judgments of semantic and episodic relatedness: Common time-course and failure of segregation , 1991 .

[12]  V. Reyna,et al.  Development of Gist Versus Verbatim Memory in Sentence Recognition: Effects of Lexical Familiarity, Semantic Content, Encoding Instructions, and Retention Interval , 1994 .

[13]  John G. Seamon,et al.  Creating False Memories of Words With or Without Recognition of List Items: Evidence for Nonconscious Processes , 1998 .

[14]  Tim Curran,et al.  Retrieval dynamics of recognition and frequency judgments: Evidence for separate processes of familiarity and recall. , 1994 .

[15]  V. Reyna,et al.  Fuzzy-Trace Theory and False Memory , 2002 .

[16]  A. Greenwald,et al.  Distinguishing unconscious from conscious cognition--reasonable assumptions and replicable findings: reply to Merikle and Reingold (1998) and Dosher (1998) , 1998, Journal of experimental psychology. General.

[17]  D. Lewkowicz,et al.  A dynamic systems approach to the development of cognition and action. , 2007, Journal of cognitive neuroscience.

[18]  E. Thelen,et al.  The dynamics of embodiment: A field theory of infant perseverative reaching , 2001, Behavioral and Brain Sciences.

[19]  B. Dosher Discriminating preexperimental (semantic) from learned (episodic) associations: A speed-accuracy study , 1984, Cognitive Psychology.

[20]  Kathleen B. McDermott,et al.  The Rise and Fall of False Recall: The Impact of Presentation Duration☆ , 2001 .

[21]  Richard L. Abrams,et al.  Subliminal words activate semantic categories (not automated motor responses) , 2002, Psychonomic bulletin & review.

[22]  Morton Ann Gernsbacher,et al.  Surface information loss in comprehension , 1985, Cognitive Psychology.