NVESTIGATING LEXICAL ACQUISITION PATTERNS: CONTEXT AND COGNITION



Analysis of the Semantic properties

Is there a differential impact of the type of exposure to new lexical items that the children
receive on the provision of semantic properties?

No significant differences were found for post test 1, while significant differences were
found for post test 2 [F(2,75)= 8.1, p<.005] and post test 3 (Kruskal-Wallis I-Way Anova:
X2 = 24.7, df=4, p<.0005). Post hoc analysis for post test 2 revealed that the Definition group
used significantly more semantic properties than the Ostensive definition and Lexical contrast
group. During post test 3 the Definition group used significantly more semantic properties
than the Control (Wilcoxon: Z=4.07, p<.0005) the Phonological control group (Wilcoxon:
Z=4.6, p<.0005), and the experimental groups (Wilcoxon: Z= 3.04, p<.005; Z=3.5, p<.0005).

Does children ,s provision of semantic properties increase with increased exposure to the
lexical items ?

All the children provided significantly more “semantic” properties in their definitions during
post test 3 than post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=4.8, p<.0000) and post test 2 (Wilcoxon: Z=3.9,
p<.0005).They also provided significantly more semantic properties during post test 2 than
post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.7, p<.005). Separate analysis for each experimental group
revealed the same pattern. Particularly the Ostensive definition group provided significantly
more
“semantic” properties during post test 3 than post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.4, p<.05) and
post test 2 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.8, p<.005). The Lexical contrast group provided significantly
more
“semantic” properties during post test 3 than post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.2, p<.05). The
Definition group provided significantly more
“semantic” properties during post test 3 than
post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=3.7, p<.0005) and post test 2 (Wilcoxon: Z=3.05, p<.005) and
significantly more
“semantic” properties during post test 2 than post test 1 (Wilcoxon: Z=2.6,
p<.05).

Does the children ,s prior knowledge of the lexical items influence the provision of semantic
properties ?

No significant differences were found by the nature of the children’s prior knowledge of the
lexical items.

217



More intriguing information

1. Migrant Business Networks and FDI
2. The name is absent
3. Wirkt eine Preisregulierung nur auf den Preis?: Anmerkungen zu den Wirkungen einer Preisregulierung auf das Werbevolumen
4. Death as a Fateful Moment? The Reflexive Individual and Scottish Funeral Practices
5. Globalization and the benefits of trade
6. Auction Design without Commitment
7. The name is absent
8. Problems of operationalizing the concept of a cost-of-living index
9. IMPLICATIONS OF CHANGING AID PROGRAMS TO U.S. AGRICULTURE
10. Cancer-related electronic support groups as navigation-aids: Overcoming geographic barriers
11. Regional Intergration and Migration: An Economic Geography Model with Hetergenous Labour Force
12. CURRENT CHALLENGES FOR AGRICULTURAL POLICY
13. ‘Goodwill is not enough’
14. Tax Increment Financing for Optimal Open Space Preservation: an Economic Inquiry
15. The Advantage of Cooperatives under Asymmetric Cost Information
16. The name is absent
17. Washington Irving and the Knickerbocker Group
18. The name is absent
19. The name is absent
20. Do Decision Makers' Debt-risk Attitudes Affect the Agency Costs of Debt?