NVESTIGATING LEXICAL ACQUISITION PATTERNS: CONTEXT AND COGNITION



Significant differences were found for post test 2 [F(2,75)=30.5, p<.0000] and post test 3
[F(4,125)=19.02, p<.0000] but not for post test 1. Table 7.13 presents the means by group
across testing.

Table 7.13 Performance (means and sds) in the “categorisation questions” by group

across testing

______________________________Post test 1______

Post test 2______

Post test 3

Mean (sd)

___Mean

(sd)

Mean

(sd)

Control

'~ .62

(.98)

Pho.Control

.69

(∙93)

Ostensive definition

.54

(-76)

.69

(97)

1.19

(1-Ю)

Lexical Contrast

.54

(■71)

.77

(■95)

1.12

(1∙24)

Definition______________

.50

(∙76)

2,73

(1∙25)

2.92

(l∙20)

Post-hoc analysis for post test 2 revealed that the Definition group performed significantly
better than the Ostensive definition and Lexical contrast group. Post-hoc analysis for post test
3 revealed that the Definition group performed significantly better than all the other groups.
Diagram 7.5 demonstrates the significant differences between the groups across testing.

Diagram 7.5 Significant group differences in the “categorisation questions” across
testing

Word knowledge questions

Three Kruskal-Wallis I-Way Anovas were carried out with group as the independent factor
and score on the questions as the dependent factor. Children’s performance in the
“world

228



More intriguing information

1. The name is absent
2. The name is absent
3. Does adult education at upper secondary level influence annual wage earnings?
4. The name is absent
5. ROBUST CLASSIFICATION WITH CONTEXT-SENSITIVE FEATURES
6. Fiscal Sustainability Across Government Tiers
7. The name is absent
8. GOVERNANÇA E MECANISMOS DE CONTROLE SOCIAL EM REDES ORGANIZACIONAIS
9. The name is absent
10. Inhimillinen pääoma ja palkat Suomessa: Paluu perusmalliin