group. The analysis within each linguistic condition indicated that the children from the
Contrast condition provided more “given contrast” responses (71.9%) than “don ,t know ”
responses during the immediate post test. Statistical analysis revealed that the differences
were significant during the immediate post test (Wilcoxon: Z=2.8, p<.005).
Key findings from the contrast task
To what extent does children ,s performance on the contrast task differ by age ?
• Significant correlations were found between children’s age and their performance on
the contrast task during the delayed post test. The same pattern was found when
children’s vocabulary and memory scores were controlled for.
• The older children performed better than the younger ones. Significant differences
were found for the delayed post test. Particularly, the 6 year-olds performed
significantly better than the 4 year-olds. There was also a trend for the 6 year-olds to
perform better than the 5 year- olds. The same pattern was evident for the Contrast
condition for both post tests. No significant differences were found for the other
linguistic conditions.
To what extent does children’s performance on the contrast task differ by linguistic
condition?
• Children in the Contrast condition performed significantly better on the contrast task
than children in the other conditions for both post tests. Children’s performance on
the contrast task within each age group differed significantly by linguistic condition
for both post tests. Each age group in the Contrast condition performed significantly
better than children in the other conditions.
To what extent does children ,s success in the contrast task change between the immediate
and the delayed post test ?
• The children performed significantly better during the immediate than the delayed
post test. Comparison of children’s performance between the two post tests within
each age group revealed the same pattern for the 4 year-olds and the 5 year-olds. The
same pattern was found for the 6 year-olds, however, the differences were not
158
More intriguing information
1. The name is absent2. The name is absent
3. IMPACTS OF EPA DAIRY WASTE REGULATIONS ON FARM PROFITABILITY
4. The purpose of this paper is to report on the 2008 inaugural Equal Opportunities Conference held at the University of East Anglia, Norwich
5. Strategic Policy Options to Improve Irrigation Water Allocation Efficiency: Analysis on Egypt and Morocco
6. Gender and headship in the twenty-first century
7. ALTERNATIVE TRADE POLICIES
8. Wirtschaftslage und Reformprozesse in Estland, Lettland, und Litauen: Bericht 2001
9. Modelling the health related benefits of environmental policies - a CGE analysis for the eu countries with gem-e3
10. Optimal Private and Public Harvesting under Spatial and Temporal Interdependence