This study explores the relationship between word learning and conceptual organization for preschool-aged children. We proposed a bidirectional model in which increases in word learning lead to increases in taxonomic organization, which, in turn, leads to further increases in word learning. In order to examine this model, we recruited 104 4-year olds from Head Start classrooms; 52 children participated in a two-week training program, and 52 children were in a control group. Results indicated that children in the training program learned more words and were more likely to sort taxonomically than children in the control condition. Furthermore, the number of words learned over the training period predicted the extent to which children categorized taxonomically. Additionally, this ability to categorize taxonomically predicted the number of words learned outside the training program, over and above the number of words learned in the program. These results suggest a bi-directional relationship between conceptual organization and word learning. 1. Introduction Preschool-aged children’s vocabulary development has long-term implications for their academic success, particularly in reading comprehension [1, 2]. Unfortunately, vocabulary knowledge is also an area where there are striking differences between children from impoverished backgrounds and those from more economically advantaged homes. By the time they enter school, children from advantaged homes have been exposed to approximately four times as many words as those from low-income households [3, 4]. Furthermore, vocabulary interventions targeted at low-SES youth tend to result in fewer gains than interventions targeted at their more advantaged peers [5], thereby perpetuating the everwidening achievement gap [6]. Thus, a crucial question at the forefront of research is how to improve the vocabulary of preschoolers from low-income backgrounds. In order to improve the vocabulary of preschoolers from low-income backgrounds, interventions must maximize the efficiency of learning both words and concepts. Vocabulary and concept knowledge are inherently linked [7]. That is, words must be associated with a concept in order to be meaningful [8]; at the same time, children need adequate vocabulary to express their conceptual knowledge and share it with others [2]. Understanding how word learning and conceptual organization are cognitively linked is therefore important for finding the best way to improve vocabulary in young children. Surprisingly, however, relatively little is known about how word learning and concept
References
[1]
A. E. Cunningham and K. E. Stanovich, “Early reading acquisition and its relation to reading experience and ability 10 years later,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 934–945, 1997.
[2]
E. D. Hirsch, “Reading comprehension requires knowledge of words and the world,” The American Educator, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 1316–1348, 2003.
[3]
B. Hart and T. R. Risley, Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experience of Young American Children, Paul H. Brookes Publishing, Baltimore, Md, USA, 1995.
[4]
B. Hart and T. R. Risley, “The early catastrophe: the 30 million word gap,” The American Educator, vol. 27, no. 1, pp. 4–9, 2003.
[5]
L. Marulis and S. B. Neuman, “The effects of vocabulary intervention on young children’s word learning: A meta-analysis,” Review of Educational Research, vol. 80, no. 3, pp. 300–335, 2010.
[6]
K. E. Stanovich, “Matthew effects in reading: some consequences of individual differences in the acquisition of literacy,” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 21, no. 4, p. 360, 1986.
[7]
A. Gopnik and A. N. Meltzoff, Words, Thoughts, and Theories, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1997.
[8]
S. Stahl and W. Nagy, Teaching Word Meanings, Erlbaum, Mahwah, NJ, USA, 2006.
[9]
A. D. Baddeley, Human Memory: Theory and Practice, Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, Mass, USA, 1997.
[10]
D. L. Medin, E. B. Lynch, and K. O. Solomon, “Are there kinds of concepts?” Annual Review of Psychology, vol. 51, pp. 121–147, 2000.
[11]
A. Blaye, V. Bernard-Peyron, J. Paour, and F. Bonthoux, “Categorical flexibility in children: distinguishing response flexibility from conceptual flexibility the protracted development of taxonomic representations,” European Journal of Developmental Psychology, vol. 3, no. 2, p. 163, 2006.
[12]
A. Blaye, N. Chevalier, and J. L. Paour, “The development of intentional control of categorization behaviour: a study of children's relational flexibility,” Cogni？ie Creier Comportament, vol. 11, no. 4, pp. 791–808, 2007.
[13]
S. P. Nguyen, “Cross-classification and category representation in children's concepts,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 43, no. 3, pp. 719–731, 2007.
[14]
S. R. Waxman and L. L. Namy, “Challenging the notion of a thematic preference in young children,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 33, no. 3, pp. 555–567, 1997.
[15]
A. L. Patalano, S. Chin-Parker, and B. H. Ross, “The importance of being coherent: category coherence, cross-classification, and reasoning,” Journal of Memory and Language, vol. 54, no. 3, pp. 407–424, 2006.
[16]
E. Rosch, C. B. Mervis, W. D. Gray, D. M. Johnson, and P. Boyes-Braem, “Basic objects in natural categories,” Cognitive Psychology, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 438–439, 1976.
[17]
E. L. Lin and G. L. Murphy, “Thematic relations in adults' concepts,” Journal of Experimental Psychology, vol. 130, no. 1, pp. 3–28, 2001.
[18]
D. B. Greenfield and M. S. Scott, “Young children's preference for complementary pairs. evidence against a shift to a taxonomic preference,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 22, no. 1, pp. 19–21, 1986.
[19]
E. M. Markman, Categorization and Naming in Children: Problems of Induction, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass, USA, 1989.
[20]
B. Rehder and R. Hastie, “Category coherence and category-based property induction,” Cognition, vol. 91, no. 2, pp. 113–153, 2004.
[21]
R. Chaffin, “Associations to unfamiliar words: learning the meanings of new words,” Memory & Cognition, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 203–226, 1997.
[22]
J. M. Whitmore, W. J. Shore, and P. H. Smith, “Partial knowledge of word meanings: thematic and taxonomic representations,” Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, vol. 33, no. 2, pp. 137–164, 2004.
[23]
A. López, S. Atran, J. D. Coley, D. L. Medin, and E. E. Smith, “The tree of life: universal and cultural features of folkbiological taxonomies and inductions,” Cognitive Psychology, vol. 32, no. 3, pp. 251–295, 1997.
[24]
R. C. Schank and R. P. Abelson, Scripts, Plans, Goals and Understanding: An Inquiry into Human Knowledge Structures, Lawrence Erlbaum, Oxford, UK, 1977.
[25]
B. Inhelder and P. Jean, The Early Growth of Logic in the Child: Classification and Seriation, Harper and Row, New York, NY, USA, 1964.
[26]
O. Sachs, S. Weis, T. Krings, W. Huber, and T. Kircher, “Categorical and thematic knowledge representation in the brain: neural correlates of taxonomic and thematic conceptual relations,” Neuropsychologia, vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 409–418, 2008.
[27]
O. Sachs, S. Weis, N. Zellagui et al., “Automatic processing of semantic relations in fMRI: neural activation during semantic priming of taxonomic and thematic categories,” Brain Research, vol. 1218, pp. 194–205, 2008.
[28]
S. S. Smiley and A. L. Brown, “Conceptual preference for thematic or taxonomic relations: a nonmonotonic age trend from preschool to old age,” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 249–257, 1979.
[29]
A. Blaye and F. Bonthoux, “Thematic and taxonomic relations in preschoolers: the development of flexibility in categorization choices,” British Journal of Developmental Psychology, vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 395–412, 2001.
[30]
S. P. Nguyen and G. L. Murphy, “An apple is more than just a fruit: cross-classification in children's concepts,” Child Development, vol. 74, no. 6, pp. 1783–1806, 2003.
[31]
J. M. Mandler and L. McDonough, “On developing a knowledge base in infancy,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 34, no. 6, pp. 1274–1288, 1998.
[32]
S. R. Waxman, E. B. Lynch, K. L. Casey, and L. Baer, “Setters and samoyeds: the emergence of subordinate level categories as a basis for inductive inference in preschool-age children,” Developmental Psychology, vol. 33, no. 6, pp. 1074–1090, 1997.
[33]
N. Hashimoto, K. K. McGregor, and A. Graham, “Conceptual organization at 6 and 8 years of age: evidence from the semantic priming of object decisions,” Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 161–176, 2007.
[34]
A. Gopnik and A. Meltzoff, “Words and thoughts in infancy: the specificity hypothesis and the development of categorization and naming,” Advances in Infancy Research, vol. 8, pp. 217–249, 1993.
[35]
A. Borovsky and J. Elman, “Language input and semantic categories: a relation between cognition and early word learning,” Journal of Child Language, vol. 33, no. 4, pp. 759–790, 2006.
[36]
S. B. Neuman, E. H. Newman, and J. Dwyer, “Educational effects of a vocabulary intervention on preschoolers word knowledge and conceptual development: a cluster-randomized trial,” Reading Research Quarterly, vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 249–272, 2011.
[37]
S. Choi and M. Bowerman, “Learning to express motion events in English and Korean: the influence of language-specific lexicalization patterns,” Cognition, vol. 41, no. 1–3, pp. 83–121, 1991.
[38]
A. Gopnik, S. Choi, and T. Baumberger, “Cross-linguistic differences in early semantic and cognitive development,” Cognitive Development, vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 197–227, 1996.
[39]
L. M. Dunn and L. M. Dunn, Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-III, American Guidance Services, Circle Pines, Minn, USA, 1998.
[40]
N. Scheuner, F. Bonthoux, C. Cannard, and A. Blaye, “The role of associative strength and conceptual relations in matching tasks in 4- and 6-year-old children,” International Journal of Psychology, vol. 39, no. 4, pp. 290–304, 2004.
[41]
A. Gopnik and A. N. Meltzoff, “Relations between semantic and cognitive development in the one-word stage: the specificity hypothesis,” Child Development, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 1040–1053, 1986.
[42]
A. Gopnik and A. N. Meltzoff, “The development of categorization in the second year and its relation to other cognitive and linguistic developments,” Child Development, vol. 58, no. 6, pp. 1523–1531, 1987.
[43]
R. C. Anderson and P. Freebody, “Vocabulary knowledge,” in Comprehension and Teaching: Research Reviews, J. Guthrie, Ed., pp. 77–117, International Reading Association, Newark, Del, USA, 1981.
[44]
T. Kaefer, S. B. Neuman, and A. M. Pinkham, “Pre-existing background knowledge influences socioeconomic differences in preschoolers’ word learning and comprehension,” Reading Psychology. In press.
[45]
M. Sénéchal, E. Thomas, and J.-A. Monker, “Individual differences in 4-year-old children's acquisition of vocabulary during storybook reading,” Journal of Educational Psychology, vol. 87, no. 2, pp. 218–229, 1995.
[46]
D. G. Kemler Nelson, K. A. O'Neil, and Y. M. Asher, “A mutually facilitative relationship between learning names and learning concepts in preschool children: the case of artifacts,” Journal of Cognition and Development, vol. 9, no. 2, pp. 171–193, 2008.
[47]
A. M. Pinkham, T. Kaefer, and S. B. Neuman, “Taxonomic organization scaffolds preschoolers' implicit word learning from storybooks,” in Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development, Montreal, Canada, April 2011.
[48]
S. B. Neuman and T. Kaefer, “Enhancing the intensity of vocabulary instruction for preschoolers at risk,” The Elementary School Journal, vol. 113, no. 4, pp. 589–608, 2013.
