Journal
CHILD DEVELOPMENT
Volume 89, Issue 3, Pages E278-E292Publisher
WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/cdev.12825
Keywords
-
Categories
Funding
- Fordham University
- John Templeton Foundation
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The ability to evaluate sins of omissiontrue but pragmatically misleading, underinformative pedagogyis critical for learning. This study reveals a developmental change in children's evaluation of underinformative teachers and investigates the nature of their limitations. Participants rated a fully informative teacher and an underinformative teacher in two different orders. Six- and 7-year-olds (N=28) successfully distinguished the teachers regardless of the order (Experiment 1), whereas 4- and 5-year-olds (N=82) succeeded only when the fully informative teacher came first (Experiments 2 and 3). After seeing both teachers, 4-year-olds (N=32) successfully preferred the fully informative teacher (Experiment 4). These results are discussed in light of developmental work in pragmatic implicature, suggesting that young children might struggle with spontaneously generating relevant alternatives for evaluating underinformative pedagogy.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available