The Effect of Categorization training on Children's inductive reasoning

김경진; 이영애

ACOMS+ 및 학술지 리포지터리 설명회

한국과학기술정보연구원(KISTI) 서울분원 대회의실(별관 3층)
2024년 07월 03일(수) 13:30

사전등록 바로가기

오늘 하루 그만보기

ENGLISH
P-ISSN1229-067X
E-ISSN2734-1127
KCI

홈으로

OA 정책

ISSN : 1229-067X

논문 상세

이전 다음

논문 투고

Vol.30 No.2

Citation Share

범주화 훈련이 아동의 귀납추리에 미치는 효과

The Effect of Categorization training on Children's inductive reasoning

한국심리학회지: 일반 / Korean Journal of Psychology: General, (P)1229-067X; (E)2734-1127

2011, v.30 no.2, pp.571-597

김경진 (이화여자대학교)
이영애 (이화여자대학교)

김경진, & 이영애. (2011). 범주화 훈련이 아동의 귀납추리에 미치는 효과. 한국심리학회지: 일반, 30(2), 571-597.

복사

초록

우리나라 유아와 초등학생의 귀납추리 발달이 유사성 포괄 모형(Osherson, Smith, Wilkie, Lopez, & Shafir, 1990)에 기초한 Lopez, Gelman, Gutheil과 Smith(1992)의 결과와 일치하는지 알아보았다. 실험 1에서 유아와 초등학생의 귀납추리 현상에 대한 수행이 Lopez 등(1992)의 결과와 일치하지 않았다. 유아들의 귀납추리 판단 능력이 발견되지 않았으며, 초등학생 역시 저조한 수행을 보였다. 특히 귀납추리 과제를 수행하기 전에 연습문제로 제시된 친숙성 문항에 대한 정답률이 상당히 낮았다. 이런 결과는 범주화 능력에서의 차이로 판단되어, 실험 2에 참가한 유․아동들은 범주화 과제를 해결하는 훈련회기를 실시한 후, 귀납판단 과제를 수행하였다. 그 결과 초등학생은 Lopez 등(1992)의 결과와 비슷한 귀납추리 패턴을 보였으나, 유아들의 귀납추리 능력은 여전히 미흡하였다. 그러므로 실험 3에서는 유아만을 대상으로 좀 더 명시적인 범주화 훈련을 했을 때 귀납추리 능력이 향상되는지를 확인하였다. 그 결과, 친숙성 문항에 대한 정답률이 Lopez 등(1992)의 연구 결과 수준으로 향상되면서 귀납추리 판단 능력도 거의 일치하는 반응패턴을 보였다. 우리나라 유․아동의 귀납추리 판단 능력이 표면적으로는 부족해 보이지만, 범주 개념에 대한 표상이 명료화되면 귀납추리 판단 능력도 잘 발휘될 수 있었다. 이 연구는 우리나라 유․아동의 귀납추리 판단 능력의 양상을 밝혔다는 점과 범주화와 귀납추리 간의 관계를 명확히 하였으며, 우리나라 유․아동이 지니고 있는 범주화 지식이 암묵적이지만, 짧은 훈련으로도 범주화 지식이 쉽게 활성화되어 명시적으로 발현될 수 있다는 것을 밝혔다는 점에서 의의가 있다.

keywords: inductive reasoning, categorization training, category-based induction, similarity coverage model, 귀납추리, 범주화 훈련. 범주 기반 귀납, 유사성 포괄 모형

Abstract

The present study examined whether the pattern of development of inductive reasoning for Korean children is consistent with that for American children as demonstrated in the work by Lopez, Gelman, Gutheil, and Smith(1992) which applied a Similarity Coverage Mode(Osherson, Smith, Wilkie, Lopez, & Shafir, 1990) to children's inductive reasoning. Experiment 1, this study replicated several inductive phenomena of Lopez et al.(1992). Performance of Korean children not well solved as compared with Lopez et al.'s. Korean children showed lower performance about familiarization task as well as inductive task. Familiarization task simple decide to which category belong to each instances in order to practice inductive task. Performance of participants needs to improvement. In experiment 2, Researchers observed whether categorization training result in improvement of children' performance. The result showed ability of inductive reasoning was improved as much as Lopez et al.'s for the grade three in the several phenomena. However, preschoolers did not show performance of familiarization task is not match to Lopez et al's. In experiment 3, After training more explicit categorization to only preschoolers, Korean preschooler showed familiarization task and inductive task were consistent with Lopez et al's results. These experiment shows inductive ability of Korean children is lower on the surface than American's. However, After focusing on categorization through short training, Inductive performance of Korean children's improved. Abstract of category concept is implicit because of focusing on relation in Korean language. This study proposes that implicit categorization ability reveals explicit one through short training, what pattern show Korean children in the inductive development, and what is the relation between ability of inductive reasoning and categorization reasoning.

keywords: inductive reasoning, categorization training, category-based induction, similarity coverage model, 귀납추리, 범주화 훈련. 범주 기반 귀납, 유사성 포괄 모형

참고문헌

신현정 (2003). 인터넷을 이용하여 작성된 범주규준의 타당도 연구Ⅰ. 한국심리학회지: 실험, 15(2), 303-347.

이관용 (1991). 우리말 범주규준 조사 -본보기 산출 빈도, 전형성, 그리고 세부특징 조사. 한국심리학회지: 실험 및 인지, 3, 131-160.

Bailenson, J. D., Shum, M. S., Atran, S., Medin, D. L., & Coley, J. D. (2002). A bird's eye view: biological categorization and reasoning within and across cultures. Cognition, 84, 1-53.

Blok, S. V., & Gentner, D. (2000). Reasoning from shared structure. Proceedings of the Twenty-second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 621-626.

Choi, S. J., & Gopnik, A. (1995). Early acquisition of verbs in Korean: a cross-linguistic study. Journal of Child Language, 22, 497-529.

Fisher, A. V., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2005a). When Induction meets memory: Evidence for gradual transition from similarity-based to category- based induction. Child Development, 76, 583-597.

Fisher, A. V., & Sloutsky, V. M. (2005b). Similarity, Induction, naming, and Categorization(SINC): Generalization of inductive reasoning? Reply to Heit and Hayes(2005) Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 134, 606-611.

Gelman, S. A. (1988). The development of induction within natural kind and artifact categories. Cognitive Psychology, 20, 65-95.

Gelman, S. A. & Coley, J. (1991). Language and categorization: The acquisition of natural kind terms. In S. A. Gelman & J. P. Byrnes (Eds.), Perspectives on language and thought: Interrelations in development (pp.146-196). New York: Cambridge University Press.

10.

Gelman, S. A. & Markman, E. (1986). Categories and induction in young children. Cognition, 23, 183-209.

11.

Gentner, D., & Medina. J. (1998). Similarity and the development of rules. Cognition, 65, 263-297.

12.

Gopnik, A., & Choi, S. J. (1990). Do linguistic differences lead to cognitive differences? A cross-linguistic study of semantic and cognitive development. First Language, 10, 199-215.

13.

Gutheil, G., & Gelman, S. A. (1997). Children's use of sample size and diversity information within basic-level categories. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 64, 159-174.

14.

Hayes, B. K., Foster, K., & Gadd, N. (2003). Prior knowledge and subtyping effects in children's category learning. Cognition. 88, 171-199.

15.

Heit, E. (1998). A Bayesian analysis of some forms of inductive reasoning. In M. Oaksford & N. Chater (Eds.), Rational models of cognition (pp.248-274). Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.

16.

Heit, E., & Hahn, U. (2001). Diversity-based reasoning in children. Cognitive Psychology, 43, 243-273.

17.

Johnson, K. E. & Mervis, C. B. (1997). Effects of varying levels of expertise on the basic level of categorization. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 126, 248-277.

18.

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1992) Beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

19.

Karmiloff-Smith, A. (1994) Précis of beyond modularity: A developmental perspective on cognitive science. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 17, 693-745.

20.

Keil, F. C., Smith. W. C., Simons. D. T., & Levin. D. T. (1998). Two dogmas of conceptual empiricism: implications for hybrid models of the structure of knowledge. Cognition, 65, 103-135.

21.

Lo, Y., Sides, A., Rozelle, J., & Osherson, D. (2002). Evidential diversity and premise probability in young children's inductive judgment. Cognitive Science, 16, 181-206.

22.

Lopez, A., Atran, S., Coley, J. D., Medin, D. L., & Smith, E. E. (1997). The tree of life: Universal and cultural features of folkbiological taxonomies and inductions. Cognitive Psychology, 32, 251-295.

23.

Lopez, A., Gelman, S. A, Gutheil, G., & Smith, E. E. (1992). The development of category- based induction. Child Development, 63, 1070-1090.

24.

Markman, E. M. (1990). Categorization and naming in children. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

25.

Maratsos, M. (1991). How the acquisition of nouns may be different from that of verbs. In N. Krasnegor, D. Rumbaugh, R. Schiefelbusch, & M. Studdert-Kennedy(eds), Biological and behavioral determinants of language development. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

26.

Medin, D. J., Lynch, E. B., Coley, J. D., & Atran, S. (1997). Categorization and reasoning among tree experts: Do all roads lead to Rome? Cognitive Psychology, 32, 49-96.

27.

Murphy, G. L. & Medein, D. L. (1985) The role of theories in conceptual coherence. Psychological Review, 92, 289-316.

28.

Murphy, G. L. & Ross, B. H. (2005) The two faces of typicality in category-based induction. Cognition, 95, 175-200.

29.

Nelson, K. (1973). Structure and strategy in learning to talk. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development. 38, 1-136.

30.

Nelson, K., Hampson, J., & Kessler Shaw, L. (1993). Nouns in early lexicons: evidence, explanations and implications. Journal of Child language, 20, 61-84.

31.

Nisbett, R. E., Peng, K., Choi, I., & Norenzayan, A. (2001). Culture and Systems of Thought: Holistic Versus Analytic Cognition. Psychological Review, 108(2), 291-310.

32.

Opfer, J. E., & Bulloch, M. J. (2007). Causal relations drive young children's induction, naming, and categorization. Cogniton, 105, 206-217.

33.

Osherson, D. N., Smith, E. E., Wilkie, O., Lopez, A., & Shafir, E. (1990). Category-based induction. Psychological Review, 97, 185-200.

34.

Osherson, D. N., Stern, J., Wilkie, O., Stob, M., & Smith, E. E. (1991). Default probability. Cognitive Science, 15, 251-269.

35.

Proffitt, J. B., Coley, J. D., & Medin, D. L. (2000). Expertise and category-based induction. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, & Cognition, 26, 811-828.

36.

Rattermann, M. J., & Gentner, D. (1998). More evidence for a relational shift in the development of analogy: Children's performance on a causal-mapping task Cognitive Development, 13, 453-478.

37.

Reber, A. S. (1993). Implicit learning and tacit knowledge: An essay on the cognitive unconscious (Oxford Psychology Series No. 19). New York: Oxford University Press.

38.

Rips, L. J. (1975). Inductive judgments about natural categories. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 14, 665-681.

39.

Sætrevik, B., Reber, R., & Sannum, P. (2006). The utility of implicit learning in the teaching of rules. Learning and Instruction, 16, 363-373.

40.

Shafto, P., & Coley, J. D. (2003). Development of Categorization and Reasoning in the Natural World: Novices to Experts, Naive Similarity to Ecological Knowledge. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 29, 641-649.

41.

Sloman, S, A. (1993). Feature-based induction. Cognitive Psychology, 25, 231-280.

42.

Sloutsky, V. M. (2003). The role of similarity in the development of categorization. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 7, 246-251.

43.

Sloutsky, V. M., & Fisher, A. V. (2004). Induction and categorization in young children: A similarity-based model. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. 133, 166-188.

44.

Smith, E. E., & Grossman, M. (2007). Multiple systems of category learning. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Review, 1-16.

45.

Smith, E. E., Patalano, A. L., & Jonides, J. (1998). Alternative strategies of categorization. Cognition, 65, 167-196.

46.

Steffler, D. J. (2001). Implicit cognition and spelling development. Developmental Review, 21, 168-204.

47.

Tenenbaum, J. B., Griffiths, T. L., & Kemp, C.(2006) Theory-based bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Science, 10, 309-318.

48.

Viale, R., & Osherson. (2000). The diversity principle and the little scientist hypothesis. Foundation of Science, 5, 239-253.

바로가기메뉴

논문 상세

Vol.30 No.2

범주화 훈련이 아동의 귀납추리에 미치는 효과

The Effect of Categorization training on Children's inductive reasoning

초록

Abstract

참고문헌

한국심리학회지: 일반