Research

We seek explanations everyday: “Why is this printer not working?”. And we give explanations everyday: “Perhaps it is out of toner”. But we prefer some explanations over others: “Perhaps it is out of toner” vs. “because it is cursed”
What drives our explanatory preferences?

People prefer explanations that characterize things in terms of broad, general patterns (Lombrozo,
2006; Williams & Lombrozo, 2010). But how does explanation result in uncovering broad patterns, specifically, in children?

Our current study aims to answer this question, and we are currently recruiting families with 5-6
year old children to participate! Go to Sign Up Now! to access our Calendly sign-up.

What age group is the study for?

4-6 year olds!

What would my child be doing in this study?
Children will be shown images of garden plots, and the researcher will ask them questions about different aspects of the pictures.

How long will it take?
Usually between 20-30 minutes!

What compensation do my child and I receive?
Your child will receive a t-shirt, book, and certificate of completion. Parents receive a $15 Amazon gift card!

Where can I sign up? 

Click Sign Up Now! on this website, or follow the link in our instagram bio @silc_northwestern

Comparison offers an effective way of learning. One advantage of comparing things is that it highlights common relational structure and promotes the learning of abstract knowledge. Comparison can also promote attention to key differences. Research also shows that relational language can interact with comparison process to promote learning. For example, labeling two situations with the same term invites comparison, which can foster learning and transfer of the
common structure. In this research, we explore a further question: Can language promote comparison-based learning of key differences; and if so, will this learning transfer to new situations and persist over delay?

Specifically, we asked whether language would aid children’s learning of a key engineering principle—namely, that diagonal braces confer stability in building structures. During training, 116
5- to 6-year-olds were shown a pair of model buildings. Within each pair, one building had a diagonal brace and was therefore stable, while the other had only horizontal crosspieces and was
unstable. Two factors were varied between-subject: the alignability of the exemplars, and whether contrasting language was used. Half the children saw a highly alignable pair, and half saw a pair that was less easy to align (Fig. 1). All children were asked to wiggle the buildings, and all found out that the braced one was more stable. Half the children in each condition then heard that only the stable one contained a ‘brace’ (a novel term); the other half was simply reminded that thestable one was ‘strong’ (Fig. 1)

Figure 1

Based on prior research, we predicted that children who saw high-alignable pairs would show better learning of the brace principle than those who saw low-alignable pairs. We further
hypothesized that labeling the difference would engage children’s curiosity and invite further comparison to discover the difference.

To assess learning, children were tested immediately on a ‘near’ repair task: they were asked to show where to add a piece to make a wobbly building stronger. Two-to-six days later, children were again given the near repair task, as well as further transfer tasks with dissimilar objects. A consistent pattern emerges that children in the high-alignment condition performed better than those in the low-alignment condition. Further, children who received the contrasting ‘brace’ label performed better than those who did not. This pattern holds for both the near repair task and the transfer tasks. Fig. 1 depicts performance on the hardest transfer task. The pattern of results
suggests that hearing contrasting language can invite structural alignment and reveal differences that inform children’s learning.

-Sean Zheng, Graduate Student

The quality of the language that children hear is important for their vocabulary growth. When presented with optimal learning situations, children can spontaneously “pick up” new words after
just hearing them a few times in passing. In this line of research, we ask what are the components that make up such situations for adjective learning. In previous studies, we examined what kinds of visual cues benefit children’s learning. Three-and four-year-olds heard a novel color word while playing a game. Although the word was not crucial to the game, children who saw easy-to-compare objects (as in the left figure below) learned the meaning of the word. Children who saw hard-tocompare objects (as in the right figure below) did not learn the word as well. In the current study, we explore what kind of verbal cues promote spontaneous adjective learning. We compared children’s learning when they were given verbal cues that encouraged comparison and when they were given verbal cues that did not evoke comparison. Preliminary results suggest that children make use of both the visual cues and verbal cues—they performed best when both types of cues encourage comparison and worst when neither cue encouraged comparison.

-Ruxue Shao, Ph.D.