The distribution of children’s responses for both post tests is presented in Table 5.12. Results
from both target words are presented together, since children’s performance on the definition
task did not differ by target item.
Table 5.12 Children’s responses in the definition task for both post tests
|
Responses______________ |
Immediate post test |
_____Delayed post test_____________ | ||
|
% |
________n_______ |
%_____ |
n_____________ | |
|
Don’t know |
39.3 |
151 |
36.4 |
140 |
|
Irrelevant responses |
5.7 |
22 |
6.2 |
24 |
|
Perceptual properties |
2.3 |
9 |
1.6 |
6 |
|
Functional properties |
15.1 |
58 |
20.3 |
78 |
|
Semantic properties1 |
37.5 |
_________144 |
35.4_________ |
136___________ |
|
N of responses__________ |
384____________ |
___________384 | ||
From the responses given, “semantic properties” (use of a basic and superordinate level
word) and “functionalproperties” were the most frequent types of responses in the definition
task for both post tests. Statistical comparison among the number of properties mentioned
revealed that all the children provided less “perceptual” than “functional” (immediate:
Wilcoxon: Z=5.07, p<.0000; delayed: Wilcoxon: Z=6.1, p<.0000) and “semantic” properties
(immediate: Wilcoxon: Z=8.2, p<.0000; delayed: Wilcoxon: Z=7.9, p<.0000) for both post
tests. Furthermore, the children provided significantly more “semantic” than “functional”
properties for both post tests (immediate: Z=5.05, p<.0000; delayed: Z=3.3, p<.005).
Whether the same pattern was evident within each age group and linguistic condition was
also investigated. The distribution of responses separately by age and linguistic condition is
presented in Appendices 5.18 and 5.19 The same pattern was evident within each age group.
The older the children are, the more “semantic” properties they use in their definitions (see
Appendix 5.18). The differences were significant for the immediate (Kruskal-Wallis, I-Way
ANOVA: X2= 41.3, df=2, p<.0000) and the delayed post test (Kruskal-Wallis, I-Way
ANOVA: X2= 22.6, df=2, p<.0000).
Furthermore, the same findings were evident within each linguistic condition. Children in the
Definition condition provided more “semantic” properties in their definitions than the
children in the other conditions (see Appendix 5.19). Statistical analysis revealed that the
1Use of basic and superordinate level words were added making one category called
semantic properties
141
More intriguing information
1. Estimating the Impact of Medication on Diabetics' Diet and Lifestyle Choices2. Assessing Economic Complexity with Input-Output Based Measures
3. The name is absent
4. Innovation and business performance - a provisional multi-regional analysis
5. The name is absent
6. Brauchen wir ein Konjunkturprogramm?: Kommentar
7. An Intertemporal Benchmark Model for Turkey’s Current Account
8. A NEW PERSPECTIVE ON UNDERINVESTMENT IN AGRICULTURAL R&D
9. The open method of co-ordination: Some remarks regarding old-age security within an enlarged European Union
10. The Impact of Cognitive versus Affective Aspects on Consumer Usage of Financial Service Delivery Channels