Two experiments investigated whether 4- and 5-year-old children are sensitive to whether the content of a generalization is about a salient or noteworthy property (henceforth “striking”) and whether varying the number of exceptions has any effect on children’s willingness to extend a property after having heard a generalization. Moreover, they investigated how the content of a generalization interacts with exception tolerance. Adult data were collected for comparison. We used generalizations to describe novel kinds (e.g., “glippets”) that had either a neutral (e.g., “play with toys”) or a striking property (e.g., “play with fire”) and measured how willing participants were to extend the property to a new instance of the novel kind. Experiment 1 demonstrated that both adults and children show sensitivity to strikingness in that striking properties were extended less than neutral ones, although children extended less than adults overall. The responses of both age groups were significantly different from chance. Experiment 2 introduced varying numbers of exceptions to the generalization made (minimal: 1 exception; maximal: 3 exceptions). Both adults and children extended both types of properties even in the face of exceptions, but to a lower degree than in Experiment 1. Striking properties were extended less than neutral ones, as in Experiment 1. We observed that the greater the number of exceptions, the lower the rates of extension we obtained, for both types of properties in adults, but only with striking properties in children. Children seemed to keep track of varying numbers of exceptions for striking properties, but their performance did not differ from chance. The findings underscore that 4- and 5-year-old children are sensitive to strikingness and to exception tolerance for generalizations and are developing toward an adult-like behavior with respect to the interplay between strikingness and exception tolerance when they learn about novel kinds. We discuss the implications of these results with regards to how children make generalizations.
Keywords generic language  generalisation  inference  language acquisition  striking property
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01971
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 65,583
External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Generics: Cognition and Acquisition.Sarah-Jane Leslie - 2008 - Philosophical Review 117 (1):1-47.
Genericity: An Introduction.Manfred Krifka, Francis Jeffry Pelletier, Gregory Carlson, Alice ter Meulen, Gennaro Chierchia & Godehard Link - 1995 - In Greg N. Carlson & Francis Jeffry Pelletier (eds.), The Generic Book. University of Chicago Press. pp. 1--124.
Generics and the Structure of the Mind.Sarah-Jane Leslie - 2007 - Philosophical Perspectives 21 (1):375–403.

View all 11 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Coherence of Love.Alan Soble - 2000 - Philosophy and Theology 12 (2):293-315.
Persons and Properties: A Sartrean Perspective on Love's Object.Gary Foster - 2018 - European Journal of Philosophy 26 (1):82-94.
Rationality and Moral Responsibility in Romantic Love.Noel Merino - 2003 - Dissertation, University of Washington
Subject-Centred Reasons and Bestowal Love.Dwayne Moore - 2019 - Philosophical Explorations 22 (1):62-77.
Love Analyzed.Roger E. Lamb (ed.) - 1997 - Westview Press.
Platonic Dispositionalism.Matthew Tugby - 2013 - Mind 122 (486):fzt071.
Why We Love the Land.Paul Schollmeier - 1997 - Ethics and the Environment 2 (1):53 - 65.
Loving People for Who They Are (Even When They Don't Love You Back).Sara Protasi - 2016 - European Journal of Philosophy 24 (1):214-234.
The Drill-Bow, Use of, in Ancient and in Modern Times, in Striking Fire.Charles Knapp - 1923 - Classical World: A Quarterly Journal on Antiquity 17:88.


Added to PP index

Total views
10 ( #882,207 of 2,461,959 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #448,803 of 2,461,959 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes