Figure 7.34 Distribution (raw data) of the properties mentioned on the story task
across testing
■ Functional H Semantic
□ Other
Considering all the properties except the “other” category, it was found that the children
provided significantly more “contextual” than “descriptive” properties across testing
(Wilcoxon, Pl: Z=2.5, p<.05; P2: Z=2.7, p<.05; P3: Z=4.9, P<.0000), more “functional” than
“descriptive” properties across testing (Wilcoxon: Pl: Z= 3.8, p<.0005; P2: Z=3.0, p<.005;
P3: Z= 5.3, p<.0000) and more “functional” than “semantic” properties (Wilcoxon: Pl:
Z=2.6, p<.05; P2: Z=3.09, p<.05). During post test 3 they also provided more “semantic”
than “descriptive” properties (Wilcoxon: Z=4.7, p<.0000).
Analysis of the “descriptive properties”
Is there a differential impact of the type of exposure to new lexical items that the children
receive on the provision of descriptive properties?
No significant differences were found for post tests 1 and 3. Significant differences were
found for post test 2 (Kruskall-Wallis 1 Way-Anova: X2 = 9.8, df= 2 p<.05). Particularly, the
Definition group provided significantly more “descriptive” properties than the Ostensive
definition (Wilcoxon: Z = 2.06, p<.05) and Lexical contrast groups (Wilcoxon: Z = 2.5,
p<.05).
Does children ,s provision of descriptive properties increase with increased exposure to the
lexical items?
Statistical analysis revealed no significant differences over time.
269
More intriguing information
1. An Investigation of transience upon mothers of primary-aged children and their school2. REVITALIZING FAMILY FARM AGRICULTURE
3. Long-Term Capital Movements
4. The name is absent
5. WP 1 - The first part-time economy in the world. Does it work?
6. IMMIGRATION POLICY AND THE AGRICULTURAL LABOR MARKET: THE EFFECT ON JOB DURATION
7. Voluntary Teaming and Effort
8. HACCP AND MEAT AND POULTRY INSPECTION
9. The name is absent
10. The name is absent