Assessing the knower-level framework: How reliable is the Give-a-Number task?

Assessing the knower-level framework: How reliable is the Give-a-Number task?
复制标题

评估知识水平框架:给出数字任务的可靠性如何?

DOI:
10.1016/j.cognition.2021.104998
复制
发表时间:
2022
期刊:
影响因子:
3.4
通讯作者:
Barner, David
Barner, David
中科院分区:
心理学2区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Marchand, Elisabeth;Lovelett, Jarrett T.;Kendro, Kelly;Barner, David

文献摘要

参考文献

被引文献

相似文献

在发展心理学中,“给出数字”任务已经成为儿童数字单词理解的金标准。最近,研究人员开始使用这项任务作为其他发展里程碑的预测指标。这就提出了这个任务有多可靠的问题,因为任何测量的重测信度都会给它和其他测量之间的可靠相关性的大小设置一个上限。在实验1中,我们向81名2至5岁的儿童提供了两次Wynn(1992)的“给出数字”任务。我们发现这个版本的任务总体上是高的,但在不同的分配的知识水平上变化很大,并且在一些知识水平上非常低。在实验2中,我们对另一组81名儿童进行了非滴定版“给出数字”任务的重测信度评估,发现了类似的结果模式。最后,在实验3中,我们通过对75名儿童进行两项任务的测试,询问两个版本的Give-a-Number是否在受试者内部产生了不同的知识水平。此外,我们还询问了这两个任务与另一个常用的数字知识测试——“这张卡片上写了什么”任务之间的关系。我们发现,总体而言,滴定版和非滴定版的Give-a-Number产生了相似的知识水平,尽管非滴定版比滴定版稍微保守一些,后者产生了略高的知识水平。两者与“卡片上的内容”的关系都不太密切。我们讨论了这些结果的理论和实践意义。
The Give-a-Number task has become a gold standard of children's number word comprehension in developmental psychology. Recently, researchers have begun to use the task as a predictor of other developmental milestones. This raises the question of how reliable the task is, since test-retest reliability of any measure places an upper bound on the size of reliable correlations that can be found between it and other measures. In Experiment 1, we presented 81 2- to 5-year-old children with Wynn (1992) titrated version of the Give-a-Number task twice within a single session. We found that the reliability of this version of the task was high overall, but varied importantly across different assigned knower levels, and was very low for some knower levels. In Experiment 2, we assessed the test-retest reliability of the non-titrated version of the Give-a-Number task with another group of 81 children and found a similar pattern of results. Finally, in Experiment 3, we asked whether the two versions of Give-a-Number generated different knower levels within-subjects, by testing 75 children with both tasks. Also, we asked how both tasks relate to another commonly used test of number knowledge, the “What's-On-This-Card” task. We found that overall, the titrated and non-titrated versions of Give-a-Number yielded similar knower levels, though the non-titrated version was slightly more conservative than the titrated version, which produced modestly higher knower levels. Neither was more closely related to “What's-On-This-Card” than the other. We discuss the theoretical and practical implications of these results.
收购法国联合国
DOI: --
发表时间: 2019
期刊: Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society
影响因子: --
作者:
Elisabeth Marchand;D. Barner
通讯作者: D. Barner
DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.06.003
发表时间: 2016-08
影响因子: 2.6
作者:
Le Corre M;Li P;Huang BH;Jia G;Carey S
通讯作者: Carey S
DOI: 10.20982/tqmp.08.1.p023
发表时间: 2012
期刊: Tutorials in quantitative methods for psychology
影响因子: --
作者:
Hallgren KA
通讯作者: Hallgren KA
土著农耕采集群体中的儿童学习数字词。
DOI: 10.1111/desc.12078
发表时间: 2014
影响因子: 3.7
作者:
S. Piantadosi;J. Jara;E. Gibson
通讯作者: E. Gibson
多种系统,一种策略:习得荷兰语和英语的序数词
DOI: 10.5334/gjgl.595
发表时间: 2020
期刊: Glossa: a journal of general linguistics
影响因子: --
作者:
C. Meyer;S. Barbiers;F. Weerman
通讯作者: F. Weerman