1. Generic Noun Phrases and Preschoolers’ Memory for Different Levels of Categories
Selin Gulgoz Susan A. Gelman
University of Michigan
Introduction
An important task of childhood is flexibly classifying the same object into multiple categories (ex.: Sam is a boy, a child, and an American).
Children are biased to label individual items at the basic level (e.g., boy rather than child), but language plays a crucial role in directing children's attention to different levels of categories (Waxman & Hatch, 1992).
Moreover, specific labels (ex. “That boy is smart”) vs. generic labels (ex. “Boys are smart”) differ in the information they convey (Gelman, ).  
Specific labels function to denote particular instances. Accordingly, the particular label used doesn't change the interpretation (e.g., "This boy is thirsty" is equivalent to "This child is thirsty").  
Generic labels function to express category scope. Accordingly, the particular label used does change the interpretation (e.g., "Boys like chocolate" is not equivalent to "Children like chocolate").
Our research question: How do category level and genericity affect children’s memory for novel information?
Methods
Sample Items:
Social domain:
Animal domain:
Results
As predicted, adults showed significantly better recall of the category label when sentences were given in generic form than in specific form. However, preschool children did not show this effect.
Importantly, the basic-level bias was found not only for specific sentences (where labels serve primarily to denote particular referents) but also for generic sentences (where labels carry important scope information).
Children and adults showed better recall for basic labels, than non-basic labels, in both the Animal and the Social domain.
Accurate Recall of Sentence Form:
Both children and adults tended to recall sentences in the form presented (see also Gelman & Raman, 2007), though adults showed better recall than children.
However, adults showed slightly better recall for correct sentence form when sentences were given in specific than in generic form, while children did not show such a difference.
Generic, Basic:
“Boys like to play a game called jimjam.”
Generic, Non-Basic:
“Kids like to play a game called jimjam.”
Specific, Basic:
“This boy likes to play a game called jimjam.”
Specific, Non-Basic:
“This kid likes to play a game called jimjam.”
Generic, Basic:
“Ladybugs like to drink danner.”
Generic, Non-Basic:
“Bugs like to drink danner.”
Specific, Basic:
“This ladybug likes to drink
danner.”
Discussion
The basic-level bias is powerful in children but also found in adults. We believe this is the first demonstration of this effect in recall of novel information.
This basic-level bias may mean that when children are taught generic information about non-basic categories, they may misremember the information as pertaining to a salient basic-level category. For example, a fact taught about people may be remembered as pertaining only to boys.
Adults show better recall for label level when sentences are presented in generic form than in specific form, which implies that they are sensitive to the informational value of labels.
The lack of this effect in children, and the strong bias children show for basic level labels might be indicative of a developmental pattern.
We are continuing to test more participants in order to derive stronger conclusions.
Hypotheses
Children may be biased to recall labels as basic-level (Rosch et al., 1976), and that bias may override the form in which the information is presented.
However, if children are sensitive to the differing informational value of labels, they should show better recall of the label in generic than specific sentences.
Specific, Non-Basic:
“This bug likes to drink danner.”
Results
Accurate Recall of Label Level
Participants at both ages had a bias to recall labels at the basic level, with better recall for basic-level than non-basic-level category labels. This effect was particularly strong among the children, though was also found among the adults. .
Methods
Participants to date*:
Preschoolers (N=30, M=4.3)
Adults (N=38)
* Data collection is ongoing.
Procedure:
Subjects were presented with a series of pictures, and heard a sentence for each.
Sentences varied in form (generic/specific), level of label (basic/non-basic), and domain (animals, social kinds).
Half of the labels each subject heard were basic level (e.g. “dog” “boy”), and half were non-basic level (e.g. “animal” “kid”).
After hearing a block of eight sentences, subjects were given a 4-min. distractor task, followed by a recall task.
References
Gelman, S. A. (2003). The essential child. New York: Oxford University Press.
Gelman, S. A., & Raman, L. (2007). This cat has nine lives? Children’s memory for genericity in language. Developmental Psychology, 43,
Rosch et al. (1976). Basic objects in natural categories. Cognitive Psychology, 8,
Waxman, S. R., & Hatch, T. (1992). Beyond the basics: Preschool children label objects flexibly at multiple hierarchical levels. J. Child Lang, 29,