UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Implicit and explicit memory in preschoolers Buller, Terri 1990

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1990_A8 B84.pdf [ 11.54MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0098373.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0098373-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0098373-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0098373-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0098373-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0098373-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0098373-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0098373-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0098373.ris

Full Text

I M P L I C I T AND E X P L I C I T MEMORY IN PRESCHOOLERS By Terri B.SC,  University  Buller o f V i c t o r i a , 1988  A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE  REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS in  THE  FACULTY OF GRADUATE STUDIES (Department o f Psychology)  We a c c e p t t h i s t h e s i s to  THE  the required  as conforming standard  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA J u l y 1990 ©Terri  B u l l e r , 1990  In  presenting  degree  at the  this  thesis  in partial  University of  freely available for reference copying  of this thesis  department publication  or  by  fulfilment of  British Columbia, and study.  of this thesis  or  her  DE-6  (2/88)  an  representatives.  may be It  is  granted  advanced  Library shall make it by the  understood  that  extensive  head  of my  copying  or  for financial gain shall not be allowed without my written  Pjb^cA^l^pA^  The University of British Columbia Vancouver, Canada  Date  for  I further agree that permission for  permission.  Department of  requirements  I agree that the  for scholarly purposes  his  the  ABSTRACT Explicit recollection  memory r e f e r s t o c o n s c i o u s of r e c e n t events  and  or d e l i b e r a t e  experiences,  whereas  memory i s r e v e a l e d when t h e same e v e n t s  and  performance  recollection.  i n the  absence of c o n s c i o u s  w e l l known t h a t i m p l i c i t differently in  early childhood,  decreases earlier  in later  i t has  performance explicit  My  and  adulthood, memory  1990).  been suggested  To  s u c h a s g o a l s and  years and  processing,  whereas  subject  controlled  s t r a t e g i e s (e.g., C r a i k ,  category  Subjects  same e f f e c t  production  procedure  involved reading  attention  on  a category  and  f o r use  a brief  some c a t e g o r i e s had than  on  this  baserate  i n the  main  and  categories.  story to focus  a more g r a d u a l  others,  response r a t e s f o r the d i f f e r e n t  and age  The  subjects  r e q u i r e d them t o name 5 i t e m s  T e s t p e r f o r m a n c e showed two  rate distributions  effects  preschoolers  for 7 different  1983).  the  to establish  tests  c o n s i s t e d o f 96  norms were g a t h e r e d  category.  or d i f f e r e n t  normative data  pattern  memory  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e . Toward  collected  p e r f o r m a n c e on  production  the  explicit  I first  experiment.  has  then  late  explain this  that implicit  automatic  and  develops  t h e s i s examines whether development d u r i n g  implicit  First,  Graf,  It is  develop  remains i n t a c t w e l l i n t o  see  affect  E x p l i c i t memory i s a c q u i r e d  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s m e d i a t e d by  preschool  that  span:  experiences  memory  whereas i m p l i c i t  i s m e d i a t e d by  processing,  goal,  life,  ( f o r review  results,  life  explicit  remains s t a b l e a c r o s s  i n childhood  adulthood of  across the  and  implicit  from  notable findings.  drop-off  i n response  second, d i f f e r e n c e s i n g r o u p s were g r e a t e r  in  iii some c a t e g o r i e s t h a n The  others.  main p a r t o f t h i s  thesis  i s an e x p e r i m e n t  examined w h e t h e r d e v e l o p m e n t h a s t h e same e f f e c t effects  on i m p l i c i t  Subjects  f o rt h i s  5-year o l d s  study  (n=36).  with category previously  and e x p l i c i t  memory t e s t  or different  performance.  c o n s i s t e d o f g r o u p s o f 12 3-, 4 - , and  The method i n v o l v e d p r e s e n t i n g s u b j e c t s  production  and c a t e g o r y  s t u d i e d items.  The i t e m s  norms a c c o r d i n g t o t h r e e c r i t e r i a : t h e norms was n o t a t f l o o r were s i m i l a r  that  cued-recall tests for were s e l e c t e d f r o m t h e  frequency  or c e i l i n g ,  of occurrence i n  occurrence  frequencies  a c r o s s age g r o u p s , and e a c h i t e m was r e p r e s e n t a b l e  as a p i c t u r e . During of  4 categories:  the in  t h e study  20 i t e m s  CLOTHES,  name e a c h i t e m  life  study  PLAYGROUND,  o f the item  Two s e t s o f t a r g e t i t e m s assess baserate  and ZOO.  each Ten o f  were s t u d i e d by e a c h s u b j e c t —  a n d 5 i n an e l a b o r a t i v e s t u d y  aspects/uses  phase.  were s t u d i e d f r o m  condition that  and answer a q u e s t i o n a b o u t (e.g.,  real-  "Do b o y s wear d r e s s e s ? " ) .  t h a t were n o t s t u d i e d were u s e d t o  performance.  t e s t i n g phase o c c u r r e d Implicit  immediately  after  memory p e r f o r m a n c e was a s s e s s e d  t h e study with  category  p r o d u c t i o n t e s t s u s i n g t h e same p r o c e d u r e  a s f o r t h e norms  study.  a category  recall  Explicit test.  t e s t s were:  5  condition that required subjects t o  them t o name e a c h i t e m  The  items  TRAVEL,  (5 p e r c a t e g o r y )  a non-elaborative  asked  phase f i v e  memory was a s s e s s e d  The c r i t i c a l more p r i m i n g  elaborative study  with  f i n d i n g s from t h e i m p l i c i t i n t h e e l a b o r a t i v e than  c o n d i t i o n s , and s i m i l a r l y  large  cuedmemory  i n t h e nonpriming  e f f e c t s a c r o s s age-groups. showed t h a t p e r f o r m a n c e  The e x p l i c i t  comparable  study  condition.  In the  c o n d i t i o n 3-year o l d s ' p e r f o r m a n c e was  thesis  implicit  and e x p l i c i t  supports  the hypothesis  to storage  illustrated  the d i s t i n c t i o n  memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  components m e d i a t i n g  related  study  t o t h a t o f t h e 5-year o l d s .  The p r e s e n t  the  results  i n c r e a s e d across age-groups, b u t only  for materials i n the non-elaborative elaborative  memory t e s t  Furthermore, i t  t h a t w h i l e t h e r e i s o v e r l a p o f some o f these  forms o f memory,  particularly  of materials, there are s i g n i f i c a n t  d i f f e r e n c e s between o t h e r m e d i a t i n g  processes  e x p l i c i t memory t h a t a r e more c l o s e l y of m a t e r i a l s .  between  o f i m p l i c i t and  associated with  retrieval  V  TABLE OF CONTENTS Abstract  i i  Table of Contents  v  List  of Tables  vi  List  of Figures  v i i  Acknowledgement  v i ii  Chapter  1:  Introduction  Chapter  2:  Implicit  1  and E x p l i c i t  Memory —  Research  and T h e o r y Chapter  3:  Study  1 —  8 P r e s c h o o l C h i l d r e n ' s Word  P r o d u c t i o n s F o r Seven C a t e g o r i e s Chapter  4:  Study  2 —  Implicit  preschoolers:  When 3 - y e a r  a s much a s 5 - y e a r Chapter  5:  and E x p l i c i t  34 memory i n  o l d s remember  olds  64  Discussion  81  References  92  A p p e n d i x A:  Category S t o r i e s  and Q u e s t i o n s . . . .  A p p e n d i x B:  A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e Tables f o r Normative Study  Appendix C  (List  99 1):  Alphabetical  Ordered  Category  P r o d u c t i o n Norms Appendix C  (List  96  2):  Numerical  101 Ordered  Category  P r o d u c t i o n Norms  116  A p p e n d i x D:  Category Production Histographs. ..  131  A p p e n d i x E:  C a t e g o r y L i n e D r a w i n g s and E l a b o r a t i v e Study C o n d i t i o n Questions  A p p e n d i x F:  135  A n a l y s i s o f V a r i a n c e T a b l e s f o r t h e Main Experiment  143  vi L I S T OF TABLES Table  1:  Number o f S u b j e c t s  p e r Age-group  Tested  i n Each  Condition Table  2:  36  The Mean Number o f Items Named p e r C h i l d f o r Each Category  Table  3:  40  The Mean Number o f D i f f e r e n t  Items Named f o r  Each Category Table  4:  42  D i f f e r e n c e s Between The Mean Number o f D i f f e r e n t Responses  Table  5:  Correlation Age-group Subjects  Table  6:  Produced p e r Category  Coefficients  P a i r Based  F o r E a c h C a t e g o r y and  on t h e P r o p o r t i o n o f  T h a t Named E a c h Item  I n d e x o f Commonality  45  V a l u e s F o r Each  Age-group  and F o r E a c h C a t e g o r y Table  7:  Tukey  Comparisons:  Commonality  Ratios  48  D i f f e r e n c e s i n Index o f f o r Each P a i r o f  Categories Table  8:  Type/Token  49 Ratios For Categories  and A c r o s s  Age-groups Table  9:  Tukey  Table  Mean D i f f e r e n c e i n  R a t i o s F o r Each P a i r o f C a t e g o r i e s . . . .  10: T y p i c a l i t y / D i v e r s i t y and A c r o s s  Table  51  Comparisons:  Type/Token  11: Tukey  43  Ratios  For Categories  Age-groups  Comparisons:  Typicality/Diversity of Categories  52  55  Mean D i f f e r e n c e s i n R a t i o s F o r Each  Pair 56  vii L I S T OF FIGURES Figure  1:  Mean % o f t a r g e t words p r o d u c e d  71  Figure  2:  Mean % o f t a r g e t words r e c a l l e d  73  viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENT I would l i k e t o acknowledge t h e a s s i s t a n c e t h a t I r e c e i v e d from Dr. P e t e r G r a f .  H i s and g u i d a n c e  i n v a l u a b l e throughout  the data c o l l e c t i o n  thesis. daycare  p a t i e n c e was  and w r i t i n g o f t h i s  S p e c i a l t h a n k s g o e s o u t t o t h e numerous V a n c o u v e r centres that assisted  my r e s e a r c h . assistance  area  i n the gathering of subjects f o r  I would a l s o l i k e t o acknowledge t h e f i n a n c i a l  from t h e N a t i o n a l S c i e n c e  Council t h a t supported student.  and e n d l e s s  and E n g i n e e r i n g  me d u r i n g my l a s t y e a r  Research  a s an M.A.  1 1  Chapter  INTRODUCTION When a s k e d  to list  t h e d i f f e r e n t games p l a y e d on t h e  school-yard during their depends on t h e a b i l i t y  this  explicit  break,  to recollect  manner i n f o r m a t i o n f r o m phrase  last  c h i l d r e n ' s performance i n a conscious,  a p a r t i c u l a r time  memory h a s been u s e d  situation.  deliberate  and p l a c e .  The  t o d e s c r i b e performance i n  I n c o n t r a s t , when a s k e d  t o s i m p l y name any  s c h o o l - y a r d games t h a t come t o mind, p e r f o r m a n c e d o e s n o t depend on t h e c h i l d r e n ' s a b i l i t y  to recollect  manner, and memory i s s a i d t o be i m p l i c i t . and  priming  (changes i n i m p l i c i t  performance e f f e c t s experiences (Graf  Implicit  memory), a r e i n d i c a t e d by  i n t h e absence o f c o n s c i o u s  1985; S c h a c t e r  & Graf,  recollection  1986).  O v e r t h e p a s t few y e a r s t h e r e h a s been a r a p i d r e s e a r c h on i m p l i c i t Schacter, Naito, and  first  memory  concerns  1989; L i g h t  t h i s work m o t i v a t e d  the different  & S i n g h , 1987;  s t a b l e through  (1990) s u g g e s t s  i m p l i c i t memory d e v e l o p s even by t h e t h i r d  my t h e s i s .  Specifically,  that implicit  the l i f e - s p a n while e x p l i c i t  There i s evidence  & G r a f , 1986) The  d e v e l o p m e n t o f i m p l i c i t and  memory a c r o s s t h e l i f e - s p a n .  by G r a f  changes.  from  growth o f  (e.g., Graf &  i n p r e s s ; P a r k i n & S t r e e t e , 1988; S c h a c t e r  explicit review  and e x p l i c i t  1985; Greenbaum & G r a f ,  three findings  memory,  a t t r i b u t a b l e t o recent events or  t h a t occur  & Schacter,  i n a conscious  memory  remains  remembering  ( e . g . , Greenbaum & G r a f ,  v e r y e a r l y and may b e f u l l y  year of l i f e .  t h e age o f 5 y e a r s t h a t e x p l i c i t  a recent  1989) t h a t intact  However, i t i s n o t u n t i l memory d e v e l o p s .  Then i t  about  2  i n c r e a s e s i n t o e a r l y a d u l t h o o d and t h e n remains  relatively  s t a b l e through t h e m i d d l e a d u l t y e a r s and d e c l i n e s l a t e i n t h e life-span.  Greenbaum and Graf (1989) have suggested t h a t these  developmental changes i n i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory.may be due t o a d e v e l o p m e n t a l l y e a r l i e r mode o f c o g n i t i v e f u n c t i o n i n g . The second f i n d i n g from t h e l i t e r a t u r e t h a t m o t i v a t e d my t h e s i s i s t h a t amnesic p a t i e n t s perform as w e l l as normals on t e s t s o f i m p l i c i t memory even though t h e y a r e s e v e r e l y i m p a i r e d on t e s t s o f e x p l i c i t memory ( e . g . , Gardner, B o i l e r , Moreines, & B u t t e r s , 1973; f o r r e v i e w see S c h a c t e r , 1987).  This finding  i l l u s t r a t e s t h a t amnesia s p a r e s t h e p r o c e s s e s t h a t mediate i m p l i c i t memory, b u t n o t those t h a t mediate e x p l i c i t memory. The q u e s t i o n t o ask here i s what i s t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e p r o c e s s e s u n d e r l y i n g each o f t h e s e forms o f memory t h a t produces t h e s e l e c t i v e s p a r i n g o f one i n amnesia.  One  p o s s i b i l i t y i s t h a t t h e p r o c e s s e s m e d i a t i n g i m p l i c i t memory d e v e l o p e a r l y and a r e more b a s i c than t h o s e u n d e r l y i n g e x p l i c i t memory and such b a s i c p r o c e s s may be more r o b u s t t o a g i n g and syndromes such as amnesia.  T h i s k i n d of e x p l a n a t i o n a l s o  t h e developmental f i n d i n g t h a t i m p l i c i t memory i s f u l l y  fits  intact  l o n g b e f o r e e x p l i c i t memory ( e . g . , Greenbaum & G r a f , 1989). The t h i r d m o t i v a t i n g f i n d i n g from t h e l i t e r a t u r e  i s the  f a c t t h a t v a r i o u s e x p e r i m e n t a l m a n i p u l a t i o n s , such as l e v e l s of p r o c e s s i n g , a f f e c t i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory differently.  F o r example, Graf and Mandler  performance  (1984) found t h a t  e l a b o r a t i v e o r s e m a n t i c p r o c e s s i n g o f study m a t e r i a l s i n c r e a s e s performance on e x p l i c i t memory t e s t s , b u t i t has no e f f e c t o r o n l y a m i n i m a l e f f e c t on t e s t s o f i m p l i c i t memory.  I n Graf and  3 M a n d l e r ' s E x p e r i m e n t 3, s u b j e c t s s t u d i e d words semantically  (by r a t i n g  how much t h e y  word) o r n o n s e m a n t i c a l l y and  liked  Then i m p l i c i t  memory were t e s t e d w i t h word-stem c o m p l e t i o n respectively.  or disliked  each  (by c o u n t i n g t h e number o f e n c l o s u r e s  T - j u n c t i o n s i n each word).  tests,  either  The c o m p l e t i o n  s i m i l a r performance i n t h e semantic  test  and e x p l i c i t and c u e d - r e c a l l  results  showed  and n o n s e m a n t i c  study  c o n d i t i o n s , whereas c u e d - r e c a l l p e r f o r m a n c e was much h i g h e r i n the semantic Graf  study  and M a n d l e r  relies  task condition.  (1984) have s u g g e s t e d  on a u t o m a t i c  controlled  To e x p l a i n t h e s e  processes  processes  such  that implicit  whereas e x p l i c i t  results, memory  memory r e l i e s on  as f o r m u l a t i n g a r e t r i e v a l  plan or  spontaneous e l a b o r a t i o n o f m a t e r i a l s .  By t h e a s s u m p t i o n  controlled  are acquired during the  or s e l f - i n i t i a t e d  preschool years,  abilities  i tfollows that implicit  memory c a n be  even i n c h i l d r e n as young as t h r e e y e a r s , w h i l e should  however, v e r y  little  intact  explicit  i n c r e a s e d u r i n g t h e same p e r i o d o f l i f e .  that  memory  At present,  r e s e a r c h h a s examined t h i s v i e w o f memory  development. Tests of Implicit The assess  and E x p l i c i t  e x t a n t r e s e a r c h h a s u s e d a wide r a n g e o f t e s t s t o  implicit  and e x p l i c i t  memory.  m a j o r t e s t s t h a t have b e e n u s e d . typically baserate  This section outlines the  Tests of i m p l i c i t  i n v o l v e t h e c o m p a r i s o n o f two d i f f e r e n t p e r f o r m a n c e and p o s t - s t u d y  performance.  p e r f o r m a n c e i s how w e l l s u b j e c t s p e r f o r m without is  Memory  a p r i o r study  episode,  performances: Baserate  on a g i v e n  whereas p o s t - s t u d y  memory  task  performance  how w e l l a s u b j e c t p e r f o r m s on t h a t same t a s k a f t e r  being  4 exposed t o a t a r g e t l i s t pictures).  The  o f m a t e r i a l s ( s u c h as words o r  difference  i n d i c a t e s the e f f e c t  between t h e s e two  of the  study  episode  T e s t s o f e x p l i c i t memory t y p i c a l l y performance a f t e r P e r f o r m a n c e on  implicit  t h e y have b e e n u s e d  and  explicit  literature.  Implicit  Memory T e s t s  f o c u s e s on  speed  and  assessed  subjects asked  production t e s t s .  are presented with t o name any  accuracy because  immediately  i n terms o f  priming.  items  For category p r o d u c t i o n  a category  label  per category  a g i v e n p e r i o d of  study episode  or a f t e r  p a r t o f a word  and  specific  c e a s i n g t o name  tests.  For these t e s t s  items  ( e . g . , CLO  ) and  s u b j e c t s are  instructed  to  i n o r s a y a l o u d w h a t e v e r word comes t o m i n d .  with category  production t e s t s ,  study  and  episode  The  time.  Word-stem c o m p l e t i o n  fill  category.  a f t e r h a v i n g named a  cue  tests  ( e . g . , CLOTHES)  t h a t belong to t h i s  subjects are g e n e r a l l y stopped  presented  a r e named  study).  i n s t r u c t i o n s make no r e f e r e n c e t o t h e p r i o r  number o f i t e m s  in a  t h o s e named i n t h e b a s e r a t e c o n d i t i o n  i n the absence of p r i o r  Category  either  period.  i s d e m o n s t r a t e d when p r e v i o u s l y s t u d i e d i t e m s  (performance  after  be  a c c u r a c y measures  memory i s o f t e n a s s e s s e d  more o f t e n t h a n  and  post-study  t e s t s may  more e x t e n s i v e l y i n t h e  relevant  Priming  performance.  s u b j e c t s a r e reminded of the study  T h i s review  Implicit  on  f o c u s on  number o f d i f f e r e n t ways, w i t h b o t h measures.  performances  priming  no m e n t i o n i s made o f t h e  As prior  i s d e m o n s t r a t e d when s u b j e c t s  c o m p l e t e t h e s t e m s w i t h more t a r g e t words t h a n t h e y w o u l d i n a  5 baserate  condition.  Word-fragment c o m p l e t i o n are very s i m i l a r is  tests.  t o word-stem c o m p l e t i o n  t h a t t h e c u e i s a word f r a g m e n t  t h e b e g i n n i n g o f a word demonstrations completion  Fragment c o m p l e t i o n tests.  The  ( e . g . , C_OT  ( e . g . , CLO  ).  tests  difference  S) i n s t e a d o f  Instructions  o f p r i m i n g a r e t h e same as w i t h  and  word-stem  tests.  E x p l i c i t Memory T e s t s For each the p r i o r  of the f o l l o w i n g t e s t s  study  e p i s o d e and a s k e d  s u b j e c t s are reminded o f  t o name i t e m s o n l y f r o m t h e  study s e s s i o n . Word R e c o g n i t i o n t e s t s .  I n word r e c o g n i t i o n  tests  subjects are presented with a word-list that contains words  (previously  s t u d i e d words) a s w e l l  (unstudied words). s u b j e c t s a r e asked word f r o m t h e s t u d y  As e a c h word i s p r e s e n t e d  list.  Subjects respond  n o t r e c o g n i z e t h e word f r o m  typically of  the study  the study  F a l s e alarms  list)  list).  ( t h e y do  o r NO  ( t h e y do  Confidence and  these  sure they are  E x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e  is  (correctly recognized  (incorrectly  target  r e c o g n i z e d new word)  may  assessed.  Cued-recall tests.  Cued-recall tests  the c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n t e s t s used memory.  w i t h YES  i n v o l v e a s k i n g t h e s u b j e c t t o r a t e how  i n d i c a t e d b y t h e number o f h i t s  a l s o be  for testing,  a l s o be c o l l e c t e d w i t h r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t s  t h e i r YES/NO answer.  words).  words  t o say whether o r not they r e c o g n i z e t h e  r e c o g n i z e t h e word as b e i n g f r o m  r a t i n g s may  as new  target  The i m p o r t a n t  difference  are very s i m i l a r to  f o r assessing  implicit  i s the i n s t r u c t i o n s .  Unlike  6 category production t e s t s , recall  test  are asked  t o use t h e cue  t o h e l p them r e c o l l e c t example, s u b j e c t s may  c a t e g o r y , and  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  cued-  (e.g., a category  label)  t h e items from t h e s t u d y s e s s i o n . be p r e s e n t e d w i t h t h e c a t e g o r y  CLOTHES, i n f o r m e d t h a t this  subjects presented with a  For  label  some o f t h e i t e m s t h e y s t u d i e d b e l o n g  asked  to recollect  those  items.  to  Explicit  i s i n d e x e d by t h e number o f t a r g e t  words  recalled. Free-recall recognition  and  recall  test,  Free-recall  cued-recall tests  to the s u b j e c t . items they can  tests.  t e s t s are d i f f e r e n t  i n t h a t no cue  They a r e s i m p l y a s k e d from the p r i o r  explicit  i s presented  to recollect  study episode.  from  as many  As w i t h t h e  cued-  memory i s i n d i c a t e d by t h e number o f  t a r g e t words t h a t t h e s u b j e c t names. Overview The The  remainder  second  thesis  i s divided  It briefly  memory r e s e a r c h c a r r i e d  older adults.  The  o u t on  m a j o r f i n d i n g s and  s t u d i e s a r e summarized e x p l a i n the Chapter  and  four s u b j e c t groups: and  young c h i l d r e n  implications  from  and  these  3-,  to  reviewed.  three d e s c r i b e s a study t h a t  First,  the motivation  and t h e o r i e s t h a t have b e e n d e v e l o p e d  f i n d i n g s are  p r o d u c t i o n norms from  and  four chapters.  reviews the extant i m p l i c i t  Amnesic p a t i e n t s , h e a l t h y young a d u l t s ,  twofold.  into  c h a p t e r p r o v i d e s the background  f o r the t h e s i s . explicit  o f my  4-,  and  5-year  involved gathering olds.  The  purpose  was  t h e c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n norms were r e q u i r e d  s e l e c t a p p r o p r i a t e items f o r a l l age-groups t h a t i n t h e main e x p e r i m e n t  (see Chapter  4).  participated  Normative  data are  to  7 critical  i n t h i s r e g a r d because v o c a b u l a r y development  i s rapid  d u r i n g t h e p r e s c h o o l years, and thus, I had t o ensure t h a t t a r g e t items were approximately e q u a l l y f a m i l i a r t o a l l agegroups.  The second purpose of t h e normative study was t o  e s t a b l i s h b a s e l i n e p r o d u c t i o n r a t e s f o r v a r i o u s items i n o r d e r t o a v o i d c e i l i n g and f l o o r e f f e c t s on t h e t e s t s used i n t h e main experiment. Chapter f o u r i s the core o f my t h e s i s ; i t d e s c r i b e s t h e method, r e s u l t s , and i m p l i c a t i o n s o f an experiment t h a t examined i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory t e s t performance 4-, and 5-year o l d s .  i n 3-,  The o v e r a l l g o a l was t o t e s t the  hypotheses t h a t e x p l i c i t memory performance  i s mediated by  c o n t r o l l e d p r o c e s s e s t h a t are not f u l l y developed, whereas i m p l i c i t memory i s mediated by automatic p r o c e s s e s . F i n a l l y , chapter f i v e p r e s e n t s a summary o f t h e o v e r a l l f i n d i n g s and d i s c u s s e s the i m p l i c a t i o n s o f t h e main experiment. In a d d i t i o n , s u g g e s t i o n s are made f o r d i r e c t i o n s of f u t u r e research.  8 Chapter 2 E X P L I C I T AND I M P L I C I T MEMORY: Over t h e p a s t  few y e a r s  s t u d i e s on e x p l i c i t  populations:  t h e r e h a s been a r a p i d g r o w t h o f  and i m p l i c i t  large portion of t h i s  RESEARCH AND THEORY  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e .  r e s e a r c h has f o c u s e d  patients with  two g r o u p s a r e most d i r e c t l y  memory d e v e l o p m e n t a c r o s s this and  chapter  reviews  subject  o r g a n i c amnesia, h e a l t h y  a d u l t s , young c h i l d r e n and o l d e r a d u l t s . last  on f o u r  Findings  relevant to  the life-span.  the research  t h e second s e c t i o n reviews  understanding  four  the t h e o r e t i c a l  young  from t h e  The f i r s t  from t h e s e  A  section of  populations,  proposals  that  have been o f f e r e d t o e x p l a i n t h e m a j o r f i n d i n g s . R e s e a r c h Review Studies with  Amnesic  A critical implicit amnesia. they  Patients  segment o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e  memory i n v o l v e s s t u d i e s o f p a t i e n t s w i t h These s t u d i e s a r e important  provided  i s t h a t they  provide  Butters  typical  by a s t u d y  a pure  amnesics'  and, t h e r e f o r e , i s n o t  o f Gardner, B o i l e r ,  (1973) who e x a m i n e d i m p l i c i t  test,  with  memory.  performance.  p a t t e r n o f performance by amnesic p a t i e n t s i s  performance u s i n g a category recall  researchers  t o c o n t a m i n a t e i m p l i c i t memory t e s t  illustrated  and i m p l i c i t  o f i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e b e c a u s e  e x p l i c i t memory i s s e v e r e l y i m p a i r e d  The  First,  a major impetus f o r t h e c u r r e n t i n t e r e s t i n  A second reason illustration  organic  f o r two r e a s o n s :  p e r f o r m a n c e d i s s o c i a t i o n between e x p l i c i t  likely  on e x p l i c i t and  respectively.  M o r e i n e s , and  and e x p l i c i t  production  memory  and c a t e g o r y  cued-  F o r t h e f o r m e r t a s k , s u b j e c t s were  9 presented  with category  t h a t came t o m i n d . presented studied  label  t o name any  and  asked  t h a t were named.  t e s t s was  The  as t h e c o n t r o l  critical  t h a t on  amnesic p a t i e n t s performed subjects.  t h a t d e f i n e s amnesia.  This selective  severe  memory i m p l i e s t h a t e x p l i c i t  and  i n p a r t , depend on  underlying processes  different  implicit  deficit  implicit  memory must, a t  least  (see Graf  &  1985).  R e c e n t work has  e x a m i n e d i n more d e t a i l  what a s p e c t s  implicit  memory a r e s p a r e d  purpose,  i n v e s t i g a t i o n s h a v e f o c u s e d on e x p e r i m e n t a l  i n amnesic p a t i e n t s .  t h a t a r e known t o have d i f f e r e n t e x p l i c i t memory t e s t  modality of study i t e m s v e r s u s new  and  Level  test  list  from  The  variables versus including  tasks, familiar  following section  each o f these One  hypothesis explicit  put and  f o c u s e s on t h e p r o c e s s e s u n d e r l y i n g t h e s e & Mandler,  t h a t amnesia s p a r e s  1984).  briefly  domains.  e x p l a i n a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s ' p e r f o r m a n c e on  memory ( e . g . , G r a f  of  this  implicit  p r e s e n t a t i o n , and  of p r o c e s s i n g a t study.  memory t e s t s  on  versus non-semantic study  associations.  experiments  effects  For  performance i n normal s u b j e c t s ,  the e f f e c t s of semantic  proposed  same  explicit  memory  sparing of  items  the  at the  In c o n t r a s t , t h e i r  memory p e r f o r m a n c e showed t h e t y p i c a l ,  reviews  items  t h e number o f t a r g e t  G a r d n e r e t a l . (1973) f o u n d  i m p l i c i t memory t e s t ,  Schacter,  six  to r e c o l l e c t previously  belonging to that category.  d e p e n d e n t measure f o r b o t h  level  asked  F o r t h e c u e d - r e c a l l t a s k , s u b j e c t s were  a category  items  l a b e l s and  Specifically,  forth  implicit forms of  i t was  i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e  b e c a u s e i t d e p e n d s p r i m a r i l y on o v e r l e a r n e d ,  automatic  to  processes while e x p l i c i t initiated that  controlled  explicit  memory d e p e n d s p r i m a r i l y  processes.  Furthermore,  memory i s i m p a i r e d  By t h e v i e w t h a t a u t o m a t i c  a f f e c t e d by s u b j e c t - i n i t i a t e d  study  trial  processing or similar manipulation  controlled test  study t r i a l  activities  processing i s not activities,  on c o n t r o l l e d patients,  Control  p r o c e s s e s , which a r e impaired  affect  amnesics'  levels  implicit  memory  subjects.  In  memory p e r f o r m a n c e d e p e n d s i n amnesic  a l e v e l s of processing manipulation  differentially  a  requiring subject-  should affect  by t h e view t h a t e x p l i c i t  guide  memory  performance i n amnesic p a t i e n t s and c o n t r o l  contrast,  holds  t o engage i n a n d / o r  o f processing t h a t mediates e x p l i c i t  performance.  of  t h i s view  i n amnesic p a t i e n t s because  t h e d i s e a s e d i m i n i s h e s one's a b i l i t y the type  on s u b j e c t -  and c o n t r o l s '  should performance:  s u b j e c t s s h o u l d have s u p e r i o r p e r f o r m a n c e  with  m a t e r i a l s p r o c e s s e d more s e m a n t i c a l l y , whereas a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s s h o u l d show no o r a r e d u c e d  levels  of processing  T h e s e e x p e c t a t i o n s were e x a m i n e d Squire,  and Mandler  (1984, E x p t .  p r o c e s s i n g by h a v i n g s t u d y words e i t h e r  3).  effect.  i n a s t u d y by G r a f , They m a n i p u l a t e d  a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s and c o n t r o l  l e v e l of  subjects  semantically or non-semantically.  Semantic  p r o c e s s i n g was i n d u c e d by a s k i n g s u b j e c t s t o r a t e words f o r likeability  (i.e.,  how much do y o u l i k e / d i s l i k e what t h i s  word  means); n o n - s e m a n t i c p r o c e s s i n g was i n d u c e d by a s k i n g them t o count  t h e v o w e l s i n e a c h word.  w i t h a word c o m p l e t i o n with  free-recall  important  test,  I m p l i c i t memory was  w h i l e e x p l i c i t memory was e x a m i n e d  and r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t s .  results.  First,  assessed  implicit  The s t u d y  showed two  memory p e r f o r m a n c e was t h e  same a c r o s s  semantic/nonsemantic study tasks,  amnesics performed as w e l l explicit  as c o n t r o l s .  memory p e r f o r m a n c e —  was h i g h e r subjects, impaired  and s e c o n d ,  And a s e x p e c t e d ,  free recall  and r e c o g n i t i o n  i n the semantic study c o n d i t i o n s  f o r the control  b u t a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s ' p e r f o r m a n c e was i n t h e s e m a n t i c and n o n s e m a n t i c s t u d y  Familiar  i t e m s v e r s u s new a s s o c i a t i o n s .  t h a t amnesia spares i m p l i c i t  —  similarly conditions.  I t i s possible  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e b e c a u s e i t  d e p e n d s on t h e a u t o m a t i c a c t i v a t i o n o f p r e - e x i s t i n g word representations examine t h i s materials  (c.f.,  Graf  possibility  & Schacter,  1985).  i s to test implicit  One way t o  memory f o r new  t h a t have no p r e - e x i s t i n g r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s  t e r m memory.  I f amnesic p a t i e n t s ' i m p l i c i t  w i t h t h e s e new m a t e r i a l s  i t i s unlikely that  i n long-  memory i s i n t a c t i m p l i c i t memory i s  mediated by t h e a c t i v a t i o n o f s u c h r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s  (Cermak,  1982). To  t e s t t h i s hypothesis,  G r a f and S c h a c t e r  (1985) e x a m i n e d  a m n e s i c s ' i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e f o r p a i r s o f u n r e l a t e d words t h a t were newly a c q u i r e d t h i s study,  during  a p r i o r study t r i a l .  a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s , m a t c h e d c o n t r o l s , and s t u d e n t  c o n t r o l s were a s k e d t o s t u d y u n r e l a t e d BALANCE-CHAIR.  Later,  explicit  pair.  of the f i r s t  word f r o m  I m p l i c i t memory was a s s e s s e d by  subjects  w i t h a word-stem c o m p l e t i o n  included  the f i r s t  each s t u d y - l i s t  word p a i r s , s u c h a s  memory was a s s e s s e d w i t h a  c u e d - r e c a l l t e s t ; t h e cue c o n s i s t e d study-list  In  three  pair  letters  (e.g.,  CHA  test.  presenting  The t e s t - i t e m s  of the right-hand ).  each  word  from  T h e s e c u e s were shown  e i t h e r p a i r e d w i t h t h e same l e f t - h a n d words a s a t s t u d y ( e . g .  12 BALANCE-CHA word  (e.g.,  motivation  [ f o r same-context i t e m s ] ) , BELIEF-CHA  • [for different-context items]).  f o r the same/different-context  a s s e s s whether i m p l i c i t  pairing  The  t e s t i t e m s was t o  memory was a f f e c t e d by a s s o c i a t i o n s  t h a t were n e w l y a c q u i r e d expected that  o r p a i r e d w i t h a new  during  the study t r i a l .  I t was  i f a s s o c i a t i o n s were f o r m e d between two words,  a stem w i t h t h e word f r o m t h e s t u d y  increase  priming.  acquired  during  list  should  In the absence o f a s s o c i a t i v e  the study t r i a l ,  i t was e x p e c t e d  information that  p e r f o r m a n c e w o u l d be s i m i l a r on same- a n d d i f f e r e n t - c o n t e x t test  items. By  of  t h e view t h a t priming  preexisting representations  amnesic p a t i e n t s were e x p e c t e d .  reflects (Graf  the automatic a c t i v a t i o n  & Schacter,  1985) and t h a t  c a n n o t l e a r n new a s s o c i a t i o n s , two r e s u l t s First,  a m n e s i c s ' i m p l i c i t memory  performance  was n o t e x p e c t e d t o be a f f e c t e d b y t h e same- v s . d i f f e r e n t context The  finding that their  context for  i n w h i c h t h e word f r a g m e n t s were p r e s e n t e d  m a n i p u l a t i o n would i n d i c a t e t h a t t h e y have some memory during  the study  S e c o n d , a m n e s i c s ' p e r f o r m a n c e was a l s o e x p e c t e d t o b e  significantly  lower than c o n t r o l s u b j e c t s '  t e s t s because o f t h e i r Contrary all  p e r f o r m a n c e i s a f f e c t e d by t h e t e s t  a s s o c i a t i o n s t h a t were n e w l y a c q u i r e d  trial.  fortesting.  groups,  inability  p e r f o r m a n c e on a l l  t o f o r m new  t o the these expectations  associations.  t h e r e s u l t s showed  i n c l u d i n g a m n e s i c s , p e r f o r m e d b e t t e r w i t h same-  than d i f f e r e n t - c o n t e x t t e s t items.  In a d d i t i o n ,  memory p e r f o r m a n c e was s i m i l a r a c r o s s  a l l subject  implicit groups.  T h e s e f i n d i n g s i l l u s t r a t e t h a t a t l e a s t some a s p e c t s o f  that  implicit  memory f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s a r e i n t a c t  patients, implicit  thereby suggesting  trial.  that the selective sparing of  memory i s n o t c o n f i n e d  extends t o e n t i r e l y  t o familiar materials, but  new m a t e r i a l s  One may a l s o h y p o t h e s i z e  encountered  reasoning  implicit  as c o n t r o l l e d  here i s t h a t s t u d i e s have g e n e r a l l y  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e t o b e u n a f f e c t e d  processes is  i n a s i n g l e study  f r o m t h i s t h a t new l e a r n i n g  may be g o v e r n e d b y a u t o m a t i c a s w e l l The  i n amnesic  (e.g.,  Graf  & Mandler,  processes. found  by c o n t r o l l e d  1984) and, t h e r e f o r e ,  i m p l i c i t memory f o r new m a t e r i a l s , Finally,  this  occurred  automatically.  explicit  memory p e r f o r m a n c e was s e v e r e l y  i f there  new l e a r n i n g h a s  i t i s important t o note impaired  that  f o r amnesic  p a t i e n t s i n a l l c o n d i t i o n s which i s c o n s i s t e n t with t h e literature  on a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s ' p e r f o r m a n c e o n e x p l i c i t  memory  tests. Related with  s t u d i e s have a l s o f o u n d  a m n e s i c s f o r new i n f o r m a t i o n  Harbluk,  & McLachlan,  programming  Modality insight in  about people  (Moscovitch,  & Tulving,  Winocur,  o f s t u d y and t e s t  i n t o whether a l l a s p e c t s  memory  (Schacter, computer  1 9 8 6 ) , and new  & Mclachlan,  list  1986).  presentation.  of implicit  Additional  memory a r e n o r m a l  a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s h a s come f r o m e x p e r i m e n t s t h a t have  examined p e r f o r m a n c e when m a t e r i a l s w i t h i n t h e same m o d a l i t y versus at  implicit  1984), s t o r i e s ( L u r i a , 1976),  ( G l i s k y , Schacter,  associations  intact  different  test;  (e.g.,  modalities  e.g., Graf,  were s t u d i e d and t e s t e d  auditory  (e.g.,  a t s t u d y and t e s t ) ,  auditory  Shimamura, & S q u i r e ,  i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s s u p e r i o r  a t s t u d y and v i s u a l  1985).  Typically,  under w i t h i n -  than  across-modality is  conditions,  not influenced To  whereas e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e  by s i m i l a r  manipulations.  examine i f a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s  show a s i m i l a r  p e r f o r m a n c e b e t w e e n - and w i t h i n - m o d a l i t y Shimamura, and S q u i r e studied  (1985) t e s t e d  either visually  conditions,  implicit  Implicit  amnesic s u b j e c t s '  test,  respectively.  implicit  memory  test  word c o m p l e t i o n  test  Results  indicated  between-modality c o n d i t i o n s .  performance i n w i t h i n -  Amnesic p a t i e n t s ' e x p l i c i t  p e r f o r m a n c e , however, was s e v e r e l y  impaired  c o n t r o l s and a s e x p e c t e d , t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e was impaired Control  i n both w i t h i n subjects'  that  memory p e r f o r m a n c e was t h e same a s  n o r m a l s ; b o t h g r o u p s showed h i g h e r  test  memory f o r words  and e x p l i c i t  p e r f o r m a n c e were a s s e s s e d w i t h a v i s u a l a free-recall  Graf,  ( p r i n t e d on c a r d s ) o r a u d i t o r i a l l y  ( s p o k e n by e x p e r i m e n t e r ) .  and  pattern of  and b e t w e e n - m o d a l i t y  than memory  compared t o equally  conditions.  p e r f o r m a n c e was t h e same f o r b o t h  study/test  conditions. The  precise pattern  o f p e r f o r m a n c e u n d e r w i t h i n - and  between-modality s t u d y / t e s t  conditions  has been  more e x t e n s i v e l y  i n s t u d i e s w i t h normal a d u l t  Kirsner, Milech,  & S t a n d e n , 1983) and w i l l  next s e c t i o n . implicit  The g e n e r a l  memory i s h i g h e r  subjects  conditions.  These f i n d i n g s suggest t h a t  m e d i a t e d a t l e a s t t o some e x t e n t (e.g.,  Roediger & Blaxton,  1987).  i n the  work i s t h a t  are studied  i n t h e same m o d a l i t y v e r s u s d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s , e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s u n a f f e c t e d  (e.g.,  be d i s c u s s e d  message f r o m t h i s when m a t e r i a l s  investigated  and t e s t e d  whereas  by m o d a l i t y implicit  memory i s  by m o d a l i t y s p e c i f i c Findings  processes  from s t u d i e s  with  amnesic p a t i e n t s s u g g e s t t h a t accidents or diseases that  s u c h p r o c e s s e s a r e s p a r e d by  i m p a i r e x p l i c i t memory  test  performance. Summary.  This collection  of studies  i l l u s t r a t e s that  a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s who a r e c h a r a c t e r i s t i c a l l y  i m p a i r e d on t e s t s  t h a t r e q u i r e e x p l i c i t memory, p e r f o r m a s w e l l s u b j e c t s on i m p l i c i t memory t e s t s .  as normal  Specifically,  amnesics'  i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e was n o r m a l w i t h f a m i l i a r and unfamiliar  (new a s s o c i a t i o n s ) m a t e r i a l s , w i t h i n -  m o d a l i t y s t u d y / t e s t m a n i p u l a t i o n s , as w e l l given different  study t r i a l  activities.  a s when t h e y were  O t h e r r e s e a r c h e r s have  examined a m n e s i c s ' i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e conditions,  such as d e l a y o f t e s t i n g  and d e l a y o f t e s t i n g Mandler,  with l e v e l of processing  T h i s c o m b i n a t i o n o f f i n d i n g s has p r o v i d e d The f i r s t ,  i s highlighted  patients'  by t h e o v e r a l l  despite their impaired.  i n amnesics. several  amnesic  c a n be e n t i r e l y  e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e  A second i n s i g h t  i m p l i c i t and  underlying processes.  findings that  i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e  various  (Graf, Squire, &  and most i m p o r t a n t , i s t h a t  e x p l i c i t memory a r e m e d i a t e d by d i f f e r e n t This  under  (Shimamura & S q u i r e , 1984)  1984) a n d h a v e f o u n d i t t o be i n t a c t  insights.  and a c r o s s -  normal  being severely  t h a t emerges f r o m t h e s e  findings  c o n c e r n s t h e n a t u r e o f t h e p r o c e s s e s assumed t o m e d i a t e i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory t e s t modality effects performance mechanisms —  performance.  The f i n d i n g o f  on i m p l i c i t b u t n o t e x p l i c i t memory  suggests that they are c o n t r o l l e d  test  by d i f f e r e n t  t h e f o r m e r g u i d e d by m o d a l i t y s p e c i f i c s e n s o r y  and p e r c e p t u a l p r o c e s s e s and t h e l a t t e r b y h i g h e r l e v e l  16  conceptual  processes.  In c o m b i n a t i o n , why i m p l i c i t  these f i n d i n g s give several  and e x p l i c i t  across the life-span. explicit  memory t e s t  t h a t t h e former the  latter.  earlier  First,  the finding that  performance  i s mediated  i s spared  suggests  s t i m u l u s p r e s e n t e d a t s t u d y and t e s t n o r m a l l y even when s u b j e c t s h a v e l o s t guide complicated processes.  may be i n t a c t  to control  are c r i t i c a l  performance.  life-span.  implicit  and g u i d e d b y t h e  the a b i l i t y  By t h i s v i e w ,  t o understanding memory t e s t  result  The u n c h a n g i n g  memory r e f l e c t  Studies with Healthy  implicit  on  function to initiate  implicit  memory  These age e f f e c t s  performance  i n performance  level  that  as w e l l as test  They a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e v i e w t h a t  c o n t r o l l e d processes that  and  late  that the processes  t h e a b s e n c e o f age e f f e c t s w i t h i m p l i c i t memory  Another  than  develop  into  and t h e y may  cognitive processes.  are t y p i c a l with e x p l i c i t  implicit  suggests  e v e n when young c h i l d r e n have n o t y e t a c q u i r e d  possibilities  the  butnot  processes  Second, t h e f i n d i n g o f m o d a l i t y e f f e c t s  t h a t m e d i a t e i m p l i c i t memory a r e i n i t i a t e d  the a b i l i t y  implicit  and c o n t i n u e t o f u n c t i o n n o r m a l l y  b u t n o t e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e  and  differently  i n amnesia  by more b a s i c b r a i n  about  I t i s possible that these basic processes  in life  adulthood.  memory m i g h t d e v e l o p  clues  i t i s the  changes a c r o s s  o f performance  t h e operation of automatic  on t e s t s o f processes.  Young A d u l t s  important  segment o f t h e l i t e r a t u r e on e x p l i c i t  memory i n v o l v e s s t u d i e s o f h e a l t h y y o u n g  adults.  T h i s g r o u p h a s been s t u d i e d most e x t e n s i v e l y and h a s p r o v i d e d evidence  f o r d i s s o c i a t i o n between i m p l i c i t  and e x p l i c i t  memory  test  performance across  a wide range o f c o n d i t i o n s  M a n d l e r , & Haden, 1984; J a c o b y  & D a l l a s , 1981).  d i s s o c i a t i o n s have been found as a r e s u l t non-semantic p r o c e s s i n g , associations, The  and m o d a l i t y  Level  illustrated  on i m p l i c i t i n a study  semantic processing.  a t study.  list  The e f f e c t s  and e x p l i c i t  subjects considered they  study  The s e m a n t i c c o n d i t i o n r e q u i r e d  focused  enclosed  them t o c o n s i d e r  words, n o t t h e i r m e a n i n g s . e f f e c t s on i m p l i c i t assessed  with  that  each o f  features of the  s u b j e c t s t o c o u n t and w r i t e (intersecting  l i n e s ) and the  s p a c e s i n e a c h word, t h u s  only perceptual The d i f f e r e n t  and e x p l i c i t  word c o m p l e t i o n  liked  For t h e non-semantic  on t h e i n t e r n a l  down t h e number o f 'T' j u n c t i o n s  directing  To e n s u r e  t h e m e a n i n g s o f t h e words i n t h i s  T h i s was done b y a s k i n g  number o f c o m p l e t e l y  subjects  s c a l e ; t h e end p o i n t s o f t h e s c a l e  were a s k e d t o r a t e how much t h e y  subjects  processing  was s e m a n t i c and n o n -  words u s i n g t h e L I K E / D I S L I K E s c a l e .  words.  of a  (1984, E x p t . 3 ) .  were l a b e l l e d L I K E and D I S L I K E , r e s p e c t i v e l y .  condition,  presentation.  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s  and Mandler  in this  t o r a t e words on a 5 - p o i n t  the  new  r e v i e w s t h e r e l e v a n t r e s e a r c h on  by G r a f  c r u c i a l manipulation  condition,  versus  factors.  of processing  manipulation  and t e s t  Graf,  Performance  of semantic  items versus  o f study  following section briefly  each o f these  The  familiar  (e.g.,  features of the l e v e l s of processing  memory t e s t  p e r f o r m a n c e were  and c u e d - r e c a l l t a s k s ,  respectively. The  implicit  memory t e s t  was n o t a f f e c t e d by t h e l e v e l s  results  showed t h a t  of processing  performance  manipulation.  18 C o n v e r s e l y , e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e was a f f e c t e d b y t h e levels of processing higher  manipulation:  f o r words s t u d i e d  R e c a l l p e r f o r m a n c e was  i n t h e semantic conditions  those s t u d i e d  i n t h e nonsemantic c o n d i t i o n s .  others  Jacoby & D a l l a s ,  (e.g.,  type of information that  implicit  controlled  illustrated for  1981) t h a t have m a n i p u l a t e d t h e  and e x p l i c i t  memory a r e m e d i a t e d by a u t o m a t i c and  respectively.  i t e m s v e r s u s new a s s o c i a t i o n s .  above t h a t a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s  new a s s o c i a t i o n s between p r e v i o u s l y  finding  activation  of pre-existing representations. implicit  memory f o r newly  a s s o c i a t i o n s between u n r e l a t e d Graf  Kirsner,  & Schacter,  1985; S c h a c t e r ,  1 9 8 2 ) , G r a f and S c h a c t e r  processed e l a b o r a t i v e l y . involves  that  engaging t h e subjects  study m a t e r i a l s .  This  implicit of the  several  acquired young  1985; C a r r o l l  (1985) f o u n d  adults &  implicit  when s t u d y m a t e r i a l s  Elaborative  memory  words.  While  words i n h e a l t h y  f o r newly formed a s s o c i a t i o n s o n l y  processing  memory were  typically  i n an a n a l y s i s o f t h e meaning o f  Conversely, non-elaborative  involves  l e s s meaningful processing  counting  t h e number o f v o w e l s i n a word.  To  unrelated  p e r f o r m a n c e may n o t m e r e l y be t h e r e s u l t  s t u d i e s have found  (e.g.,  I t was  do show i m p l i c i t  i s i m p o r t a n t because i t i l l u s t r a t e s  memory t e s t  s t u d y , and  processed a t study, support the hypothesis  processes,  Familiar  This  than f o r  processing  of materials,  such as  further investigate the influences of elaborative  processing  on i m p l i c i t  S c h a c t e r and Graf  and e x p l i c i t  memory f o r new  associations  (1986, E x p t . 3 & 4) c a r r i e d o u t a n o t h e r  w i t h new a s s o c i a t i o n s .  This  study consisted  study  o f a meaningful  and  an a n o m a l o u s s t u d y c o n d i t i o n .  were p r e s e n t e d w i t h s e n t e n c e s the meaningful meaningful  In both c o n d i t i o n s s u b j e c t s  c o n t a i n i n g two t a r g e t w o r d s .  c o n d i t i o n s u b j e c t s were p r e s e n t e d w i t h a  sentence  ( e . g . , "The i n j u r e d  FLOWER") a n d i n t h e anomalous c o n d i t i o n with a nonmeaningful sentence t o t h e CANDLE").  to The  'the sentence  'the sentence level  related  does n o t r e l a t e  t h e words m e a n i n g f u l l y ' (1)  ( E x p t . 4) i n v o l v e d  required subjects to either 'extremely  rate a pair of  unpleasant'  p l e a s a n t ' (5) - o r t o g e n e r a t e o f words i n a m e a n i n g f u l  s i n g l e word t h a t r e l a t e d t h e p a i r complete sentence  a sentence manner.  that  Another  (as above).  s u b j e c t s generate  either a  o f words o r t o g e n e r a t e  Implicit  and e x p l i c i t  p e r f o r m a n c e were a s s e s s e d w i t h word c o m p l e t i o n  a  memory  and c u e d - r e c a l l  respectively.  From t h i s found  (1) t o  ( E x p t 1) i n c l u d e d a m a n i p u l a t i o n o f t h e e x t e n t o f  e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g by h a v i n g  tasks,  ranging  r e l a t e s t h e words q u i t e m e a n i n g f u l l y ' ( 5 ) .  the pair  experiment  presented  o f t h e words o n a 5 - p o i n t s c a l e  w o r d s on p l e a s a n t n e s s - f r o m 'extremely  s u b j e c t s were  ( e . g . , " t h e new ROCK was r e t u r n e d  of processing manipulation  conditions that  OFFICER s m e l l e d t h e  I n b o t h c o n d i t i o n s s u b j e c t s were a s k e d t o  r a t e t h e meaningfulness from  In  study Schacter and Graf  (1986, E x p t .  t h a t w h i l e performance on t e s t s o f i m p l i c i t  memory f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s b o t h meaningful different  relations,  and e x p l i c i t  required elaboration of  e a c h was a f f e c t e d  d i f f e r e n t l y by  types of associative elaboration.  subjects generated  3 & 4)  Specifically,  an a s s o c i a t i o n b e t w e e n two words,  memory p e r f o r m a n c e was t h e same w h e t h e r t h e y g e n e r a t e d  when  implicit a  single  20 word o r a c o m p l e t e performance  sentence.  was h i g h e r when s u b j e c t s g e n e r a t e d  r e l a t i o n s with a sentence Graf  (1986) c o n c l u d e d  relations  Conversely, e x p l i c i t  are v i t a l  new a s s o c i a t i o n s ,  S c h a c t e r and  that while e l a b o r a t i o n o f meaningful  f o rboth  implicit  and e x p l i c i t memory f o r  o n l y e x p l i c i t memory b e n e f i t s  i n implicit  are important  relations.  and e x p l i c i t  f o r two r e a s o n s .  from These  memory t e s t  First,  they  more  performance  support the  h y p o t h e s i s t h a t t h e s e two forms o f memory a r e m e d i a t e d different  underlying processes.  complexity  Second, they  o f t h e ways i n w h i c h t h e s e two f o r m s o f memory  M o d a l i t y o f s t u d y and t e s t  list  hypothesis concerning the mediating e x p l i c i t memory i s t h a t  Another  f a c t o r s o f i m p l i c i t and  i m p l i c i t memory, b u t n o t e x p l i c i t processes  a f f e c t e d by m o d a l i t y m a n i p u l a t i o n s T h i s i d e a h a s stemmed from  s u b j e c t s t h a t have f o u n d  investigation.  presentation.  memory, d e p e n d s on m o d a l i t y s p e c i f i c  1987).  by  i l l u s t r a t e the  o p e r a t e a n d t h e y e m p h a s i z e t h e need f o r f u r t h e r  is  test  an a s s o c i a t i v e  v e r s u s a s i n g l e word.  extensive e l a b o r a t i o n of meaningful differences  memory  implicit  m a t e r i a l s a r e s t u d i e d and t e s t e d  and, t h e r e f o r e ,  (see Roediger  several  & Blaxton,  studies with  normal  memory t o be s u p e r i o r when i n one m o d a l i t y  (e.g., s t u d i e d  and  tested  i n visual  m o d a l i t y ) t h a n when m a t e r i a l s a r e s t u d i e d  and  tested  i n d i f f e r e n t m o d a l i t i e s ( S c h a c t e r & G r a f , 1989;  K i r s n e r , M i l e c h , & Standen,  1983; R o e d i g e r  & Blaxton,  1987).  To examine t h e e f f e c t s o f m o d a l i t y on i m p l i c i t and explicit  memory G r a f , Shimamura, a n d S q u i r e  (1985) p r e s e n t e d  h e a l t h y y o u n g a d u l t s w i t h s p o k e n and w r i t t e n w o r d s . t h a t s u b j e c t s analyzed t h e semantic  To  ensure  f e a t u r e s o f the study  list  w o r d s , t h e y were a s k e d from  'like  extremely'  studying the items,  t o r a t e t h e words on a 5 - p o i n t (1) t o ' d i s l i k e  implicit  memory t e s t  a s s e s s e d w i t h a word c o m p l e t i o n free recall presented  test.  extremely'  test  visually;  t h e r e f o r e , items  —  (5). After  p e r f o r m a n c e was  and e x p l i c i t  T h e word c o m p l e t i o n  scale  memory w i t h a  t e s t was a l w a y s  studied i n the v i s u a l  m o d a l i t y were i n t h e w i t h i n - m o d a l i t y c o n d i t i o n , and i t e m s  that  were s t u d i e d i n t h e a u d i t o r y m o d a l i t y were i n t h e b e t w e e n modality that  condition.  implicit  Graf,  memory t e s t  Shimamura, and S q u i r e  similar  Conversely,  i n t h e between-modality  e x p l i c i t memory t e s t  p e r f o r m a n c e was  across these c o n d i t i o n s .  Summary.  These s t u d i e s i l l u s t r a t e  t h a t i m p l i c i t and  e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e c a n be d i s s o c i a t e d by  levels of processing, familiarity  manipulations  have a l s o  differently. from  & Graf,  found  r e s e a r c h has  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i n h e a l t h y young  a d u l t s under v a r i o u s c o n d i t i o n s , such  and  Other  o f a v a r i e t y o f o t h e r m a n i p u l a t i o n s on  and e x p l i c i t  (e.g., Schacter  experimentally  o f m a t e r i a l s , and m o d a l i t y  i n h e a l t h y young a d u l t s .  examined t h e e f f e c t s implicit  found  p e r f o r m a n c e was s u p e r i o r i n t h e  within-modality c o n d i t i o n than condition.  (1985)  as d e l a y o f t e s t i n g  1986; f o r r e v i e w  these  s e e S c h a c t e r , 1987)  two forms o f memory t o be a f f e c t e d  In combination,  these  f i n d i n g s complement  results  s t u d i e s w i t h amnesic p a t i e n t s and they s t r e n g t h e n t h e  claim that implicit  a n d e x p l i c i t memory a r e m e d i a t e d b y  different underlying processes. D e v e l o p m e n t a l S t u d i e s w i t h Young C h i l d r e n o r O l d e r A third  Adults  domain o f r e s e a r c h r e l e v a n t t o my t h e s i s  i s work  on t h e d e v e l o p m e n t life-span. implicit different  of i m p l i c i t  and e x p l i c i t memory a c r o s s t h e  Developmental s t u d i e s t y p i c a l l y  and e x p l i c i t  memory t e s t  factors at different  examine how  performance  points  i s a f f e c t e d by  i n the life-span.  Such  s t u d i e s a r e important because t h e y can l e a d t o a b e t t e r understanding o f t h e p r o c e s s e s t h a t mediate explicit  memory t e s t  performance.  i m p l i c i t and  In general,  developmental  s t u d i e s have f o u n d t h a t w h i l e e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s increasing early 1985)  i n the life-span  and d e c r e a s i n g  late  (e.g., Bjorklund  i n the life-span  & Bjorklund,  (e.g. Salthouse,  1 9 8 2 ) , i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e r e m a i n s r e l a t i v e l y throughout the e n t i r e Graf,  1989; L i g h t  life-span  & Singh,  (e.g., Graf,  i n this  memory i n c h i l d r e n .  early  item.  (1988) h i g h l i g h t s t h e  development  of i m p l i c i t  (drawings w i t h m i s s i n g  i t e m s and a s k e d them t o i d e n t i f y  S u b j e c t s were f i r s t  p r e s e n t e d t h e most  p r e s e n t a t i o n o f i t e m s was c o n t i n u e d e i t h e r u n t i l identified  the drawing o r the f i n a l  v e r s i o n ) d r a w i n g was shown.  Later,  items as w e l l  as f i f t e e n  each  The the subject  (complete  s u b j e c t s were p r e s e n t e d  with another s e t o f fragmented drawings t h a t original  line  fragmented  d r a w i n g and t h e n i n c r e a s i n g l y c o m p l e t e d r a w i n g s .  correctly  and e x p l i c i t  They p r e s e n t e d 3-, 5-, 7 - y e a r o l d s and  a d u l t s w i t h fragmented drawings segments) o f v a r i o u s  1990; Greenbaum &  1987).  A s t u d y by P a r k i n a n d S t r e e t e differences  constant  i n c l u d e d both the  distractors.  Implicit  memory  t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e was i n d e x e d b y t h e d i f f e r e n c e b e t w e e n t h e l e v e l s a t w h i c h t h e d r a w i n g was i d e n t i f i e d second p r e s e n t a t i o n s  (savings).  on t h e f i r s t and  E x p l i c i t memory  performance  was a s s e s s e d w i t h a r e c o g n i t i o n t e s t . the to  Here s u b j e c t s  were shown  c o m p l e t e d r a w i n g s o f t a r g e t and d i s t r a c t o r i t e m s a n d a s k e d s e l e c t t h o s e i t e m s t h e y had p r e v i o u s l y  seen i n t h e study  list. Parkin in 3-,  implicit  and S t r e e t e  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e a c r o s s  5-, 7- y e a r o l d s  contrast,  and a d u l t s  across  performed s i g n i f i c a n t l y performed b e t t e r  performed e q u a l l y  differences age g r o u p s ;  well.  explicit  b e t t e r t h a n 7-year o l d s ,  7-year  and Myers  memory p e r f o r m a n c e t o be s u p e r i o r  study, c o r r e c t r e c o g n i t i o n  of previously  f r o m 81% i n t h e y o u n g e r age g r o u p 92% i n t h e o l d e r  implicit the  (1974) a l s o t o older  age g r o u p  seen items  (mean = 2 y e a r s ,  In t h i s increased  11 months)  (mean = 4 y e a r s ) .  and r e l a t e d f i n d i n g s r a i s e q u e s t i o n s memory p e r f o r m a n c e  a b o u t why  i s s t a b l e through the e a r l y part of  l i f e - s p a n while e x p l i c i t  memory p e r f o r m a n c e c h a n g e s .  not those processes t h a t u n d e r l i e  Previous adults  research  reveals  implicit  w i t h amnesic p a t i e n t s  that the operations  explicit  research  memory  and w i t h h e a l t h y  involved  Does  memory? young  i n t h e s e two forms  o f memory a r e h i g h l y c o m p l e x , and i t i s hoped t h a t extensive  found  children  development a f f e c t t h e p r o c e s s e s t h a t mediate e x p l i c i t but  olds  performed  when t e s t i n g was c a r r i e d o u t w i t h a r e c o g n i t i o n t a s k .  This  memory  olds.  A n o t h e r s t u d y by P e r l m u t t e r  to  In  these age-groups; t h e a d u l t s  t h a n 5 - y e a r o l d s , and 5 - y e a r o l d s  t h a n 3-year  explicit  the four  and c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h e l i t e r a t u r e ,  performance i n c r e a s e d  better  (1988) f o u n d no s i g n i f i c a n t  more  on t h e e a r l y d e v e l o p m e n t o f i m p l i c i t and  memory t e s t s w i l l  i l l u m i n a t e these  processes.  24 Level implicit  of processing  memory i s f u l l y  a t study.  One h y p o t h e s i s  developed e a r l y i n l i f e  mediated by p r o c e s s e s t h a t  i s that  because i t i s  a r e a u t o m a t i c , whereas  explicit  memory d e v e l o p s l a t e r b e c a u s e i t i s m e d i a t e d by p r o c e s s e s are  subject-controlled or i n i t i a t e d  acquired If  this  First,  later  i n t h e course o f development  i s true,  a level  of processing  This  In c o n t r a s t ,  reveal  age-related  view a l s o p r e d i c t s t h a t memory i s n o t y e t f u l l y  levels of processing  reasoning  here i s that  process materials and  1979).  findings.  manipulation should  i n c r e a s i n g age, a l e v e l s  manipulation should  the  Kail,  not affect  by t h e v i e w  that  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s m e d i a t e d b y c o n t r o l l e d p r o c e s s e s  which develop w i t h  explicit  (e.g.,  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s m e d i a t e d by a u t o m a t i c  p e r f o r m a n c e o f any a g e - g r o u p s . explicit  control i s  one w o u l d e x p e c t two c r i t i c a l  i fimplicit  processes,  and t h i s  that  of processing  performance d i f f e r e n c e s .  y o u n g e r s u b j e c t s , whose intact, will  b e n e f i t more f r o m  manipulation than older c h i l d r e n .  The  i f young c h i l d r e n l a c k t h e a b i l i t y t o  more e x t e n s i v e l y ,  guides t h i s type of processing  p e r f o r m a n c e up t o a l e v e l  then a task should  bring  comparable t o t h a t  who a r e c a p a b l e o f i n i t i a t i n g  this  that  induces  their  of older  subjects  type of processing  on t h e i r  own. Naito study  ( i n p r e s s ) i n v e s t i g a t e d some o f t h e s e i s s u e s  i n v o l v i n g c h i l d r e n i n grade one, t h r e e ,  college students.  I n two d i f f e r e n t  p r e s e n t e d w i t h a 32 i t e m  word-list,  i n a semantic study c o n d i t i o n condition.  ina  s i x , and i n  experiments, subjects 16 o f w h i c h were  presented  a n d 16 i n a n o n - s e m a n t i c  The s e m a n t i c s t u d y c o n d i t i o n r e q u i r e d  were  study  subjects t o  i d e n t i f y t h e semantic category t o which The  non-semantic  study c o n d i t i o n r e q u i r e d  whether o r n o t a p a r t i c u l a r word.  The f i r s t  each  experiment assessed i m p l i c i t  memory w i t h a f r e e r e c a l l  similar  test.  increased  a c r o s s t h e f o u r age-groups  Conversely, performance  a c r o s s t h e age g r o u p s :  significantly third  higher than f i r s t ,  and s i x t h  significantly  h i g h e r than f i r s t  versus t h e non-semantic performance sufficient  and performance  was  study task  on e x p l i c i t memory  tests  C o l l e g e students performed third,  and s i x t h g r a d e r s ; and  graders.  In a d d i t i o n ,  f o rmaterials  study c o n d i t i o n s .  a l l age-  i n the semantic  However,  increased  a t t r i b u t e d t o t h e s t u d y c o n d i t i o n was n o t t o b r i n g t h e younger  of the older The  memory  g r a d e r s (who p e r f o r m e d t h e same) p e r f o r m e d  g r o u p s ' p e r f o r m a n c e was s u p e r i o r  level  in implicit  a c r o s s t h e s e m a n t i c and n o n - s e m a n t i c  conditions.  memory w i t h a  and t h e s e c o n d a s s e s s e d e x p l i c i t  As e x p e c t e d , t h e r e was no d i f f e r e n c e performance  subjects t o state  l e t t e r was p r e s e n t o r a b s e n t i n t h e  word-fragment c o m p l e t i o n t e s t ,  test  item belonged.  latter  s u b j e c t s ' performance  up t o t h e  subjects'.  f i n d i n g h a s two i n t e r p r e t a t i o n s .  F i r s t , the  e l a b o r a t i v e s t u d y c o n d i t i o n may h a v e e n a b l e d e v e n t h e y o u n g e s t s u b j e c t s t o p r o c e s s m a t e r i a l s t o a g r e a t e r e x t e n t t h a n t h e y do on t h e i r  own, b u t t h e i r p r o c e s s i n g was s t i l l  as t h a t o f o l d e r  subjects.  elaborative processing  n o t as e x t e n s i v e  A second p o s s i b i l i t y  i s o n l y one o f t h e f a c t o r s  i s that that  contributes to the age-related differences t y p i c a l l y in  explicit  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e .  H a i t o ' s s t u d y s u p p o r t t h e view t h a t  Overall,  exhibited  the results  i m p l i c i t memory  remains  from  constant  across the life-span  and t h a t i t i s u n a f f e c t e d by a  levels of processing manipulation,  whereas e x p l i c i t  performance v a r i e s a c r o s s age-groups t h a t d i f f e r ability  to initiate  and g u i d e  memory  test  i n their  p r o c e s s i n g o f to-be-remembered  items. Summary.  Previous  major f i n d i n g s . constant  developmental  First,  implicit  work h a s p r o v i d e d  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  f r o m t h e p r e s c h o o l age t o y o u n g a d u l t h o o d  performance does n o t i n c r e a s e o r d e c r e a s e Second, i m p l i c i t of  processing manipulations  Third,  explicit  part of l i f e ,  and t h i s  is  Fourth,  important  controlled  fully they  result  General  d u r i n g t h e same s p a n o f l i f e .  levels of processing  and e x p l i c i t  points i n the life-span,  developmental  automatic  These p r o c e s s e s a r e and t h u s  p a t t e r n s o f i m p l i c i t and  memory. Summary by s t u d i e s o f amnesic  p a t i e n t s , h e a l t h y y o u n g a d u l t s , and y o u n g c h i l d r e n First,  within-modality both  young  of these f i n d i n g s  memory a r e m e d i a t e d by  respectively.  at different  i n different  implication  F i v e major f i n d i n g s a r e i l l u s t r a t e d  adults.  early  manipulations  memory p e r f o r m a n c e f o r b o t h  and f a m i l i a r  processes,  functional  explicit  by l e v e l s  and c o l l e g e - a g e d a d u l t s .  that implicit  and  ages).  i n c r e a s e i s most n o t a b l e between 2- and  tend t o i n c r e a s e e x p l i c i t  The  (i.e.,  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i n c r e a s e s d u r i n g t h i s  4-years o f age.  children  remains  across these  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s n o t a f f e c t e d  four  implicit  and o l d e r  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s h i g h e r i n  c o n d i t i o n s than  across-modality  a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s and h e a l t h y y o u n g a d u l t s .  conditions f o r Second,  h e a l t h y young a d u l t s ' e x p l i c i t  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s t h e same  w h e t h e r m a t e r i a l s a r e s t u d i e d and t e s t e d i n t h e same o r i n different  modalities.  associations  Third, implicit  i s present  young a d u l t s .  Fourth,  young a d u l t s a n d w i t h  i n both  memory f o r n e w l y  formed  amnesic p a t i e n t s and h e a l t h y  across d i f f e r e n t  ages, w i t h  amnesic p a t i e n t s , i m p l i c i t  memory i s n o t  affected  by l e v e l s  explicit  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s h i g h e r when m a t e r i a l s a r e  processed  more s e m a n t i c a l l y f o r b o t h  across d i f f e r e n t no  effect The  and  of processing manipulations.  healthy  memory t e s t  i m p l i c a t i o n s of these  processes.  performance.  findings are,  first,  memory a r e m e d i a t e d b y d i f f e r e n t Second, t h e p r o c e s s e s  a r e , t o some e x t e n t , m o d a l i t y explicit  h e a l t h y y o u n g a d u l t s and  a g e - g r o u p s , whereas t h e same m a n i p u l a t i o n h a s  on i m p l i c i t  explicit  mediating  specific,  f o c u s on s e m a n t i c / c o n c e p t u a l  remembered m a t e r i a l s .  m e d i a t e d by c o n t r o l l e d  is  automatic.  Fourth,  processes  underlying memory  whereas those  mediating  p r o p e r t i e s o f to-be-  Third, since there  is  implicit  implicit  i s implicit  f o r new m a t e r i a l s , i t i s p o s s i b l e t h a t e i t h e r  are automatic  Fifth,  implicit  memory memory  o r t h a t some new l e a r n i n g  the processes  underlying implicit  memory  and a r e u n a f f e c t e d b y e f f o r t s t o c o n t r o l t h e way  i n which m a t e r i a l s a r e processed. m e d i a t e d b y more c o n t r o l l e d  memory i s  processes.  o f t h e o r i e s t h a t attempt t o  f o r these  p e r s p e c t i v e s a r e reviewed:  explicit  or s e l f - i n i t i a t e d  What f o l l o w s i s a r e v i e w provide explanations  Fifth,  results.  activation,  Three  p r o c e s s i n g , and s y s t e m s  views. Theoretical  theoretical  Explanations  28 The  following theoretical  sections. which  Each s e c t i o n  review i s divided  presents a brief  into  three  outline of a theory  i s t h e n f o l l o w e d by an a c c o u n t o f how w e l l t h a t t h e o r y  accommodates t h e f i n d i n g s  from s t u d i e s reviewed  Throughtout t h i s  two t e r m s  processing — defined  section,  a r e used r e p e a t e d l y ,  —  above.  a u t o m a t i c and c o n t r o l l e d  and t h u s , t h e y w i l l  be  first.  In a r e c e n t r e v i e w , Logan  (1985) l i s t e d  t h e d i f f e r e n t ways  i n w h i c h some r e s e a r c h e r s h a v e u s e d t h e t e r m a u t o m a t i c & Z a c k s , 1979; J o n i d e s ,  1981; L o g a n ,  1978, 1979; P o s n e r &  Snyder,  1975; S c h n e i d e r & S h i f f r i n ,  1977).  Automatic processes are those t h a t  quickly,  effortlessly,  or impossible t o control  & Snyder,  1975).  " c a n be p e r f o r m e d  autonomously".  Other  (e.g., Jonides,  1981; P o s n e r  Automatic processes are often contrasted with  p r o c e s s e s and t h e r e i s a t e n d e n c y t o v i e w a u t o m a t i c  and c o n t r o l l e d alternative  & Schneider,  that automatic processes are  difficult  controlled  1977; S h i f f r i n  and r e l a t i v e l y  t h e o r i s t s have e m p h a s i z e d  (Hasher  as a dichotomy  ( s e e Logan,  1985).  The  i s t o v i e w them a s e n d - p o i n t s on a c o n t i n u u m  (Logan  ,1985) . Throughout  my t h e s i s ,  I u s e t h e t e r m s a u t o m a t i c and  controlled t o refer t o processes at different continuum.  Automatic p r o c e s s e s a r e viewed  and g u i d e d e x t e r n a l l y  —  (see C r a i k ,  Activation is  that  implicit  Views.  as b e i n g  initiated  by t h e environment, w h i l e c o n t r o l l e d  p r o c e s s e s a r e viewed as b e i n g c o n t r o l l e d individual  points along a  internally  —  by t h e  1983). The b a s i c p r e m i s e o f a c t i v a t i o n t h e o r y  memory a r i s e s  from t h e a c t i v a t i o n  ofp r e -  existing 1980).  representations  (e.g.,  Graf  & M a n d l e r , 1984; M a n d l e r ,  Proponents o f t h i s view c l a i m t h a t t h e d i s s o c i a t i o n o f  implicit  and e x p l i c i t  different  kinds  representation  memory a r i s e s f r o m t h e u t i l i z a t i o n o f  of information (Graf  f r o m t h e same u n d e r l y i n g  & Mandler, 1984).  Graf  a r g u e t h a t when a f a m i l i a r word i s p r e s e n t e d automatically activation  causes a strengthening the activating  In turn, t h i s  likelihood  are  (Graf  & Mandler,  as a r e s u l t ,  performance. finding that conscious  1984).  is one  increases the  should  Furthermore, c o n t r o l l e d  implicit  processes  have no i n f l u e n c e on i m p l i c i t i s consistent with  memory  the general  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s u n a f f e c t e d  t o process  on a  of integration or redintegration  materials  by a  e l a b o r a t i v e l y ( t o a more  level).  On t e s t s o f e x p l i c i t memory, G r a f that  t o form a u n i f i e d  p a r t s o f t h e word a r e p r e s e n t e d  This expectation  effort  meaningful  stimulus  of r e - a c t i v a t i o n , or redintegration, of the  not used i n t h e process  and,  This  or integration of the  integrative processing  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n when o n l y test  (1984)  f o r study, i t  i t s l o n g - t e r m memory r e p r e s e n t a t i o n .  representation with whole.  and M a n d l e r  and M a n d l e r  (1984) a r g u e  s u c c e s s f u l p e r f o r m a n c e i s e x h i b i t e d o n l y when t h e s u b j e c t  able t o access  (deliberately  o f t h e p a t h s t o t h e word.  recall)  t h e t a r g e t word  They s u g g e s t t h a t s u c h  through  access  p a t h s a r e made more a c c e s s i b l e when one h a s p e r c e i v e d r e l a t i o n s among a s e t o f w o r d s . these  More i m p o r t a n t l y ,  the establishment  r e l a t i o n s that increase the a c c e s s i b i l i t y  achieved  through e l a b o r a t i v e processing  Therefore,  of  o f a path a r e  o f t h e words.  when t a r g e t i t e m s a r e e l a b o r a t i v e l y p r o c e s s e d ,  paths  l e a d i n g t o t h a t word's r e p r e s e n t a t i o n This  i s consistent with the general  processing By  increases  explicit  t h i s view there  implicit  and e x p l i c i t  a r e made more a c c e s s i b l e .  finding that  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e .  are four basic  expectations  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e .  memory p e r f o r m a n c e s h o u l d  elaborative  First,  implicit  n o t b e a f f e c t e d by c h a n g e s i n t h e  processing  of study m a t e r i a l s  activation  and i n t e g r a t i o n , o p e r a t e a u t o m a t i c a l l y .  implicit  with  because i t s mediating  memory p e r f o r m a n c e s h o u l d  processes, Second,  be s t a b l e a c r o s s  the l i f e -  s p a n b e c a u s e t h e p r o c e s s e s a r e a u t o m a t i c and, t h e r e f o r e , be  fully  that  intact early i n l i f e .  This  should  i s b a s e d on t h e p r e m i s e  automatic p r o c e s s e s a r e b a s i c and b a s i c p r o c e s s e s a r e  fully  f u n c t i o n a l long before  processes.  Third, explicit  changes i n p r o c e s s i n g directly Fourth, later  c o n t r o l l e d and more complex memory s h o u l d  be a f f e c t e d by  because semantic processing  a f f e c t s a v a i l a b l e paths t o the target e x p l i c i t memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e s h o u l d  in life  of materials  word. be f u l l y  intact  t h a n i s i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e and i n c r e a s e  t h r o u g h most o f t h e l i f e - s p a n b e c a u s e i t s m e d i a t i n g  processes  are  development  controlled.  increases  i s b a s e d on t h e argument t h a t  the resources  performance In  This  (see Graf,  that  are required  forexplicit  1990).  summary, an a c t i v a t i o n v i e w makes p r e d i c t i o n s t h a t a r e  s u p p o r t e d by t h e major f i n d i n g s from s t u d i e s w i t h patients, provides  memory  healthy  young a d u l t s ,  a n d young c h i l d r e n a n d i t  a useful tool f o r research  Processing  views.  amnesic  w i t h young c h i l d r e n .  Proponents o f the processing  a t t r i b u t e t h e d i f f e r e n c e s between i m p l i c i t  view  and e x p l i c i t  memory  to the d i f f e r e n t (Schacter,  processing  1987).  demands a t s t u d y  The b a s i s o f t h i s  to t r a n s f e r appropriate  v i e w i s somewhat r e l a t e d  (e.g., K o l e r s  Morris,  holds  t h a t p e r f o r m a n c e on memory t e s t s depends on t h e  other  & Franks,  of the processes  Roediger,  1984).  This  r e q u i r e d a t study  w o r d s , what i s i m p o r t a n t  p r o c e d u r e s and s k i l l s  1977).  & Roediger,  1984;  similarity  Bransford,  processing  and a t t e s t i n g  perspective  and a t t e s t .  In  t o performance a r e t h e  one b r i n g s  t o a memory t a s k  R o e d i g e r and B l a x t o n  (Kolers &  (1987) h o l d  a similar  view o f p r o c e s s i n g which i s d i r e c t e d a t t h e d i s s o c i a t i o n o f implicit  and e x p l i c i t  memory.  implicit  and e x p l i c i t  memory a c t u a l l y d i s t i n g u i s h t a s k s  require dataFor  example,  They suggest t h a t t e s t s o f  and c o n c e p t u a l - d r i v e n  processing, respectively.  i n a word i d e n t i f i c a t i o n  task  subjects  s t u d i e d words a t a b e t t e r r a t e t h a n n o n - s t u d i e d a brief  g l i m p s e o f t h e word  Blaxton  (1987) a r g u e t h a t s u c h p r o c e s s i n g  (Jacoby,  1983b).  driven  o f the m a t e r i a l a t study  processing,  however, t y p i c a l l y  identify  words f r o m  R o e d i g e r and  of the perceptual  and t e s t .  employ  Conceptual-  subject-initiated  activities  s u c h a s s e m a n t i c e l a b o r a t i o n and o r g a n i z i n g ,  is  t o t h e r e q u i r e m e n t s o f e x p l i c i t memory  similar  Systems v i e w s .  reflect  different  Tulving  (1985) d e s c r i b e s  and e x p l i c i t  u n d e r l y i n g memory s y s t e m s  consist of a neural  substrate  that  memory a c t u a l l y (Schacter,  a memory s y s t e m s a s b e i n g  s t r u c t u r e o f elementary o p e r a t i n g  which  tests.  Systems t h e o r i s t s h o l d t h e v i e w  d i s s o c i a t i o n s between i m p l i c i t  only  i s data-driven  b e c a u s e i t i s d e p e n d e n t upon t h e s i m i l a r i t y characteristics  that  an  1987). organized  components w h i c h , i n t u r n ,  and i t s b e h a v i o r a l o r c o g n i t i v e  correlates.  F u r t h e r m o r e , he s u g g e s t s t h a t  be s h a r e d b y a l l , The  systems  some, o r none o f t h e o t h e r memory  that Tulving  It  i s involved  i s to this  to r e t a i n  in skill  The p r o c e d u r a l  (1985) a t t r i b u t e s t h e a b i l i t y  l e a r n e d c o n n e c t i o n s between s t i m u l i  performance.  memory  l e a r n i n g and r e p e t i t i o n p r i m i n g .  system t h a t T u l v i n g  and he a r g u e s t h a t  systems.  (1985) p r o p o s e s a r e t h e p r o c e d u r a l ,  s e m a n t i c a n d e p i s o d i c memory s y s t e m s . system  s u c h components may  i t mediates  implicit  memory  and r e s p o n s e s , test  The s e m a n t i c memory s y s t e m i s more l o n g - t e r m and  assumed t o r e p r e s e n t  facts  or t h e w o r l d i n g e n e r a l .  —  knowledge a b o u t words, c o n c e p t s  However, i t l a c k s  specific  i n f o r m a t i o n r e g a r d i n g t h e t i m e and p l a c e o f e v e n t s o r where t h e i n f o r m a t i o n was l e a r n e d .  Finally,  t h e e p i s o d i c memory s y s t e m c o n t a i n s t i m e s and p l a c e s .  (1985) s u g g e s t s t h a t  information pertaining t o  I t i s t h e e p i s o d i c memory s y s t e m w h i c h i s  viewed as t h e b a s i s (Schacter,  Tulving  1987).  forexplicit T h i s system  d e c l a r a t i v e memory s y s t e m w h i c h  memory o f r e c e n t  events  i s also similar t o the S q u i r e a n d Cohen  hypothesized as t h e b a s i s f o r e x p l i c i t  (1984) have  memory.  A v i e w more i n t e n d e d t o e x p l a i n t h e i m p l i c i t  and e x p l i c i t  memory d i s s o c i a t i o n  i s t h a t p u t f o r t h by S c h a c t e r and  Moscovitch  They d i s t i n g u i s h between e a r l y  (1984).  d e v e l o p i n g memory s y s t e m s  and s u g g e s t e d t h a t t h e e a r l y  d e v e l o p i n g s y s t e m s u p p o r t s memory a b i l i t i e s young  children.  performance  They  s e e n i n i n f a n t s and  also suggest that e x p l i c i t  memory  i s m e d i a t e d by a s y s t e m t h a t d e v e l o p s l a t e r  a f f e c t e d more b y t r a u m a s . implicit  and l a t e  and e x p l i c i t  and i s  T h i s view e x p l a i n s t h e changes i n  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  across the life-span,  but  does n o t e f f e c t i v e l y  two  forms o f memory p e r f o r m a n c e a r e d i f f e r e n t . Summary.  lend  itself  t o e x p l a i n i n g why t h e s e  E a c h o f t h e s e above v i e w s e x p l a i n some a s p e c t  the  i m p l i c i t / e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e d i s t i n c t i o n .  the  a c t i v a t i o n v i e w seem t o have t h e g r e a t e s t  power, i t d o e s n o t f o l l o w f r o m t h i s  that  While  explanatory  i t i s the only  view.  These views s h o u l d be c o n s i d e r e d t o g e t h e r s o t h a t  e a c h c a n be  used as a t o o l  between  implicit  f o r understanding the d i s s o c i a t i o n  and e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  Chapter STUDY 1:  PRE-SCHOOL CHILDREN'S WORD PRODUCTIONS FOR  The  primary  7 CATEGORIES.  g o a l of the f i r s t  b a s e r a t e p r o d u c t i o n d a t a on how the d i f f e r e n t  items  e x e m p l a r s on p r i m i n g  or  i s i n d i c a t e d by  i n the  prior  Baserate different  collect  such  second  i m p l i c i t memory t e s t  as  category  performance.  a f t e r study)  minus  p r o d u c t i o n d a t a were c o l l e c t e d The  t a s k was  by p r e s e n t i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s  procedures  from  g e n e r a l method was  to  seven invite  from  were u s e d .  I n one,  of the  o f two  children,  level  of preschoolers  of short s t o r i e s  (see  Two  slightly  different  the puppet p r o c e d u r e , p l u s h hand p u p p e t s a t  subjects the  s e s s i o n , whereas w i t h t h e o t h e r p r o c e d u r e The  p u p p e t s were u s e d  (the experimenter  appeared  to the  i n t h e form  a category.  p u p p e t s were u s e d . session  adapted  from  E a c h s t o r y ended w i t h a q u e s t i o n t h a t r e q u i r e d  were i n t r o d u c e d t o one beginning  (i.e.,  study).  The  naming i t e m s  named i n  the  condition  s u b j e c t s t o p l a y a game t h a t i n v o l v e d naming i t e m s  Appendix A ) .  this  the p r o p o r t i o n of t a r g e t items  condition (i.e.,  categories.  categories.  CLOTHES.  part of  i n f l u e n c e of s t u d y i n g  p r o p o r t i o n o f t a r g e t s named i n t h e b a s e r a t e without  to  t h a t compose a c a t e g o r y ,  t h e s i s which examines the  the experimental  s t u d y was  f r e q u e n t l y p r e s c h o o l e r s name  T h e s e d a t a were r e q u i r e d f o r u s e  Priming  3  to read the  manipulated  s t o r i e s and  to create a play  t h e puppets so  ask t h e q u e s t i o n s )  as o p p o s e d t o a q u e s t i o n i n g s e s s i o n .  t h a t the p l a y s e s s i o n would h e l p c h i l d r e n  no  they f o r the  I t was  f e e l more  hoped  comfortable  w i t h t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r and m a i n t a i n for  a longer period of  their  interest  i n the study  time. Method  Materials Category categories  production  norms were c o l l e c t e d  l o o s e l y d e f i n e d a s TOYS,  u s e d f o r TRAVEL  animals  f o r seven  i n a ZOO,  things  (modes o f t r a n s p o r t a t i o n ) , t h i n g s y o u s e e i n a  RESTAURANT, t h i n g s y o u s e e i n a KITCHEN, t h i n g s y o u s e e a t a PLAYGROUND, and CLOTHES. on  their  familiarity  to  four sentences  from a c a t e g o r y  The s e l e c t i o n o f c a t e g o r i e s was  t o 3-year-olds.  l o n g , were u s e d t o e l i c i t (see Appendix A ) .  question that inquired either saw when v i s i t i n g zoo)  Seven s t o r i e s ,  a place  naming o f  items  about something t h e p r o t a g o n i s t  ( e . g . , what a n i m a l s  could ride  three  Each s t o r y ended w i t h a  o r about p o s s i b l e s o l u t i o n s t o a problem  K e l l y ' s parents  each  based  i n when g o i n g  Kerry (e.g.,  to v i s i t  saw a t t h e what  their  relatives). Two p l u s h hand p u p p e t s for  t h e puppet procedure.  create a play-time maintain  their  a n d a p i g ) were u s e d  The p u p p e t s were i n t r o d u c e d t o  session f o r the c h i l d r e n i n order to  interest  procedure without  (an a l l i g a t o r  f o r a longer p e r i o d o f time.  the puppets served  t o asses  The  the influence of  p u p p e t s on c h i l d r e n ' s p e r f o r m a n c e . Subjects Ninety-six preschoolers  (42 b o y s a n d 54 g i r l s )  daycare centers  i n Vancouver served  three-year  (15 b o y s and 20 g i r l s )  with  a mean age o f 3.5  3.0 - 3 . 9 ) , 32 f o u r - y e a r  olds  (13 b o y s and 19  years  olds  (range:  as s u b j e c t s .  from  T h e r e were 35  girls)  with  five-year years  a mean age o f 4.48 y e a r s  olds  (range:  (range:  (14 b o y s and 15 g i r l s ) 5.0 - 5 . 7 ) .  each group i s presented  4.0 - 4.9) and 29  w i t h a mean age o f 5.20  The number o f c h i l d r e n  i n Table  tested i n  1.  Table 1 Number o f S u b j e c t s p e r A g e - g r o u p T e s t e d  3-years  4-years  i n Each C o n d i t i o n .  5-years  Total  Puppet  18  19  16  53  No P u p p e t  17  13  13  43  Total  35  32  29  96  Design  and  The period  Procedure  procedure  c o n s i s t e d o f an i n t r o d u c t i o n a n d i n s t r u c t i o n  f o l l o w e d by s e v e n  consecutive t r i a l s .  For the f i r s t  p e r i o d c h i l d r e n were i n t r o d u c e d t o t h e e x p e r i m e n t e r to  p l a y a s t o r y game w i t h h e r .  First,  and i n v i t e d  the experimenter  went  w i t h t h e c h i l d r e n t o a q u i e t room o r c o r n e r away f r o m t h e regular  activities.  the c h i l d r e n  A f t e r making f r i e n d l y c o n v e r s a t i o n w i t h  the experimenter  gave t h e f o l l o w i n g i n s t r u c t i o n s :  "What we a r e g o i n g t o do i s p l a y a s t o r y game.  I'm g o i n g t o r e a d y o u a s t o r y and  then  I am g o i n g t o a s k y o u a q u e s t i o n t h a t  will  h e l p you t o f i n i s h  Okay, a r e y o u r e a d y ? For each t r i a l ,  the c h i l d  t h e s t o r y f o r me.  Here i s t h e f i r s t  story..."  was r e a d a s t o r y and t h e n  a q u e s t i o n t h a t r e q u i r e d naming i t e m s  from t h e c a t e g o r y  asked  t a r g e t e d by category  and  Each t r i a l of  the story.  Each t r i a l  f o c u s e d on  a  different  7 c a t e g o r i e s were t e s t e d i n a random  the  began w i t h r e a d i n g t h e s t o r y t h a t was  the c a t e g o r i e s .  The  stories  are presented  order.  related  to  i n Appendix  one  A.  Each s t o r y  ended i n a q u e s t i o n t h a t r e q u i r e d c h i l d r e n t o name  items  one  from  of the t a r g e t c a t e g o r i e s ( i . e . ,  Kelly's parents to  ride  i n t o go v i s i t  encourage c h i l d r e n  t h e i r r e l a t i v e s ? " was  t o name i t e m s  from  C h i l d r e n were e n c o u r a g e d t o name f i v e c a t e g o r y ; when t h e y had prompted w i t h rephrased  difficulty  a rephrased  "What c o u l d  the category  different  v e r s i o n of the question.  q u e s t i o n s were a l s o p r e s e n t e d  TRAVEL).  items  naming more i t e m s ,  f o r each they  The  to the c h i l d r e n  i f they  types  o f t h e same i t e m  of  found  i n a r e s t a u r a n t t h e y name  different was  items  k i n d s of food, such  done t o e n c o u r a g e t h e naming o f d i f f e r e n t  exemplars.  The  also  i n A p p e n d i x A.  pig  a s hamburgers and  listed  different  p u p p e t were u s e d  were a s k e d category  q u e s t i o n s used Finally,  (e.g., i n s t e a d  hotdogs).  other than  This  category  f o r each c a t e g o r y  b e c a u s e an a l l i g a t o r  as a . c o n d i t i o n o f t h e e x p e r i m e n t ,  t o name a n i m a l s  were  same  p e r s e v e r a t e d on d i f f e r e n t naming d i f f e r e n t  used  p i g or a l l i g a t o r  are and  a  children f o r the  ZOO. Results  The  critical  each age-group. variables:  data are the Data a n a l y s e s  the o v e r a l l  items  number o f i t e m s  t h e number o f d i f f e r e n t  category,  and  items  named f o r e a c h named f o r e a c h  t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f s u b j e c t s t h a t named e a c h  a n a l y s e s showed no  by  f o c u s e d on t h r e e d e p e n d e n t  category,  Preliminary  named f o r e a c h c a t e g o r y  significant differences  in  item.  38 p e r f o r m a n c e between b o y s and puppet c o n d i t i o n . these v a r i a b l e s for  Consequently,  o r between t h e p u p p e t and  t e s t s was  set at  .05  list  alpha-level  otherwise  i n Appendix  Appendix C l i s t s  d i f f e r e n t words named f o r e a c h c a t e g o r y by The  The  unless  A l l ANOVA t a b l e s a r e p r e s e n t e d  Word P r o d u c t i o n F r e q u e n c i e s .  olds.  3-,  4-,  B.  the and  5-year  a l s o c o n t a i n s t h e number o f s u b j e c t s and  p r o p o r t i o n o f s u b j e c t s t h a t named e a c h word i n r e s p o n s e category question. more u s e f u l  index  performance. and  The  I t i s the  are l i s t e d  n u m e r i c a l l y (by f r e q u e n c y  production data category)  ways,  of p r o d u c t i o n ) .  the a b s c i s s a l i s t s  the  alphabetically Parts of  the  per  i n A p p e n d i x D.  i n response  them by  by  hierarchies  across categories.  a large proportion of s u b j e c t s .  c a t e g o r y TOYS, r e s p o n s e s number o f w o r d s .  The  both  For  analyses that f o l l o w provide  words  a large  different  i n responding  across  categories.  t o name f i v e  Although items  from  the  the  In c o n t r a s t , f o r  a r e s p r e a d more e v e n l y o v e r  methods f o r d e s c r i b i n g t h i s d i f f e r e n c e  Number o f I t e m s .  the  the h i s t o g r a p h s i n Appendix D i s t h e  CLOTHES, f o r example, a s m a l l p o r t i o n o f t h e  were named by  children  For  frequency.  f i n d i n g t h a t i s underscored  i n A p p e n d i x C and  category  i n two  each  the o r d i n a t e represents the p r o p o r t i o n of s u b j e c t s  most i m p o r t a n t  difference  to  baserate  ( t h e 20 most f r e q u e n t l y named words  naming e a c h word and  lists  the  value that provides  a r e d i s p l a y e d i n h i s t o g r a p h form  each graph  The  latter  of category production t e s t items  no  t h e d a t a were c o l l a p s e d a c r o s s  f o r a l l subsequent a n a l y s e s .  a l l statistical  indicated.  girls  instructions required  e a c h c a t e g o r y , many o f  the  youngest c h i l d r e n the dependent  found t h i s t a s k d i f f i c u l t .  variable  f o r the f i r s t  For t h i s reason,  a n a l y s i s was t h e a v e r a g e  number o f r e s p o n s e s p r o d u c e d by e a c h age g r o u p category.  This  a v e r a g e was c a l c u l a t e d b y t a k i n g t h e t o t a l  number o f r e s p o n s e s f o r a p a r t i c u l a r dividing  no  c a t e g o r y and age-group and  i t b y t h e number o f c h i l d r e n  summarized  f o r each  i n T a b l e 2, h i g h l i g h t  large differences  tested.  two p o i n t s .  The r e s u l t s , First,  there are  i n t h e a v e r a g e number o f i t e m s named  across the categories.  T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n was c o n f i r m e d b y a  one-way ANOVA w i t h c a t e g o r y a s t h e i n d e p e n d e n t  variable,  F(6,14)  the tabled  = .298, MS  = .239. More i m p o r t a n t l y ,  C  show t h a t t h e 3 - y e a r o l d s named  fewer  items p e r category than  b o t h t h e 4- a n d 5 - y e a r o l d s , w h i c h d i d n o t d i f f e r other.  means  from  each  T h i s o b s e r v a t i o n was c o n f i r m e d b y a one-way ANOVA  showed a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t 29.706, M S  e  = .049.  f o r age-group,  F(2,18)  Follow-up a n a l y s e s u s i n g Tukey's  showed t h a t t h e 3 - y e a r o l d s named s i g n i f i c a n t l y  fewer  that  =  HSD t e s t items  t h a n t h e 4 - y e a r o l d s , p_<.001, and t h e 5 - y e a r - o l d s , p_<.001, w h i l e t h e 4- a n d 5 - y e a r o l d s d i d n o t d i f f e r . Number o f D i f f e r e n t showed t h a t year olds,  Items.  W h i l e t h e above  3 - y e a r o l d s named f e w e r i t does  analysis  i t e m s t h a n t h e 4- a n d 5-  n o t i n d i c a t e whether  the diversity  o f items  named by 3 - y e a r o l d s i s s i m i l a r t o t h a t o f 4- and 5 - y e a r The  number o f d i f f e r e n t  to assess the d i v e r s i t y  olds.  i t e m s named f o r a c a t e g o r y i s one way of responses f o r a given category.  different  a n d more p r e c i s e method o f a s s e s s i n g c a t e g o r y  diversity  i s discussed  later.  The n e x t a n a l y s i s  c a t e g o r y d i v e r s i t y w i t h t h e number o f d i f f e r e n t  examines items  A  Table 2 The Mean Number o f Items Named p e r C h i l d f o r E a c h  Category  S u b j e c t Age Group  3 years  Category  n* I t e m s  4 years  +  n  Items  5 years  n  Items  M  SD  Clothes  30  4 .17  32  4.84  28  4.93  4.64  .41  Kitchen  30  4.23  31  4.94  28  4.75  4.64  .37  Zoo  32  4.06  32  4.84  28  4.96  4.62  .49  Playground  31  4.06  32  4.66  28  4.61  4.44  .33  Restaurant  29  3.87  32  4.53  27  4 .70  4.37  .44  Travel  31  3.39  31  4.84  28  4.79  4.34  .82  Toys  28  3 .89  32  4.66  27  4.32  4.29  .39  M SD  3.95  4.76  4.72  .28  .14  .22  * Number o f c h i l d r e n t h a t were t e s t e d on e a c h + Mean number o f i t e m s named p e r c h i l d .  category.  named f o r e a c h c a t e g o r y an  index  of d i v e r s i t y ,  d i v i d e d the  as t h e  dependent v a r i a b l e .  responses per  category  g r o u p by t h e number o f s u b j e c t s  i n that condition.  are  cell  findings.  i n Table  First,  age-groups with  3.  The  respect  observation,  t o the  age  F(2,18) =  number o f d i f f e r e n t  MSe  =  .436.  categories with  i t e m s named.  T h i s was  F ( 6 , 1 4 ) = 115.726, MSe test  =  .011.  are presented  i t e m s named.  s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e s f o r a l l but  the  4.  confirmed  Second,  there  respect to  confirmed  by  for  Follow-up analyses i n Table  main  across  independent v a r i a b l e  .004,  the a one-  category,  using  They p o i n t  following  age-  results  means h i g h l i g h t two  ANOVA w h i c h showed a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t  T u k e y ' s HSD  The  number o f d i f f e r e n t  as t h e  were l a r g e d i f f e r e n c e s a c r o s s  way  and  t h e r e were o n l y m i n i m a l d i f f e r e n c e s  A one-way ANOVA w i t h this  obtain  I  number o f d i f f e r e n t  summarized  To  to  category  p a i r s : RESTAURANT/PLAYGROUND, KITCHEN/ZOO, CLOTHES/TRAVEL,  and  PLAYGROUND/ZOO. Response r a t e c o r r e l a t i o n s a c r o s s method o f i n d e x i n g  age-groups.  d i f f e r e n c e s i n t h e naming o f  a g e - g r o u p s i s t o compute a P e a r s o n c o r r e l a t i o n the  response r a t e s  item).  The  following analyses  e x p e c t e d was  across  coefficient  a s k e d , f o r e x a m p l e , how  3-year o l d s t o those  of  4-year  that older subjects should  than younger s u b j e c t s because they category  exemplars.  category  d i v e r s i t y with  discrepancy  items  on  ( p r o p o r t i o n o f s u b j e c t s t h a t named e a c h  are response r a t e s of What we  Another  If this  between two  similar olds?  name more  items  have b e e n e x p o s e d t o more  i s t r u e , t h e r e w o u l d be  i n c r e a s i n g age-groups.  The  age-groups with  to  respect  increasing l a r g e r the  response  Table 3 The  Mean Number o f D i f f e r e n t Items Named f o r E a c h  Category  S u b j e c t Age G r o u p  3 years  Category  n*  Items" " 1  4 years  5 years  n  n  Items  Items  M  SD  Toys  28  2 .75  32  2.91  27  2 .89  2.85  .09  Restaurant  29  1.79  32  1.84  27  1.81  1.81  .02  Playground  31  1.83  32  1.69  28  1.61  1.71  .11  Zoo  32  1.25  32  1.41  28  1.61  1.42  .18  Kitchen  30  1.47  31  1.35  28  1.39  1.40  .06  Clothes  30  1.03  32  .84  28  1.07  .98  .12  Travel  31  .90  31  .97  28  .82  .90  .07  M SD  1.57  1.57  1.60  .63  .69  .66  * Number o f c h i l d r e n t h a t were t e s t e d + Mean number o f d i f f e r e n t i t e m s  on e a c h  category.  named p e r c h i l d .  43 Table 4 D i f f e r e n c e s between t h e mean number o f d i f f e r e n t produced f o r each category.  Toys  Restrnt  Playgrd  Zoo  Kitchen  responses  Clothes  Travel  Toys  0.00  Restrnt  1.04*** 0.00  Playgrd  1.14*** 0 . 1 0  Zoo  1.43***  0.39**  0.29  Kitchen  1.45***  0.41**  0.31*  Clothes  1.87***  0.83***  0.73*** 0.42**  0.44**  0.00  Travel  1.95***  0.91  0.81*** 0.50***  0.52***  0.08  n s  ***  ns= non s i g n i f i c a n t ;  0.00 n s  0.00 0.02  n s  0.00  n s  * = p<.05.; ** = p< .01; *** = p<.001  0.00  rates,  t h e l o w e r s h o u l d be t h e c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t o f  response r a t e s . as  diverse  N o t e , however, t h a t  t h e c a t e g o r y m i g h t n o t be  as e x p e c t e d because, i n a d d i t i o n  to  knowledge o f d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r y e x e m p l a r s w i t h subjects  age, o l d e r  a r e a l s o more l i k e l y t o have more c a t e g o r y  One p o s s i b l e likely  increasing  r e s u l t of t h i s i s that  the older  c h i l d r e n a r e more  t o name t y p i c a l c a t e g o r y e x e m p l a r s a n d ,  produce a l e s s d i v e r s e  c a t e g o r y which would  knowledge.  therefore,  increase  correlation coefficients. To  examine t h e s e p o s s i b i l i t i e s  response frequency group.  (see L i s t  I then c o r r e l a t e d  I r a n k - o r d e r e d t h e words by  2 i n A p p e n d i x C) o f e a c h a g e -  t h e response r a t e s  between t h e d i f f e r e n t a g e - g r o u p s u s i n g coefficient. for is  a Pearson  correlation  5 p r e s e n t s two c o r r e l a t i o n s c o e f f i c i e n t s  each age-group p a i r  a c r o s s the seven c a t e g o r i e s .  b a s e d o n a l l t h e i t e m s named f o r a c a t e g o r y .  correlation the  Table  f o r a l l items  c o e f f i c i e n t ( t h e one i n b r a c k e t s )  20 most f r e q u e n t l y  named i t e m s .  This  first  The s e c o n d  i s b a s e d on  only  latter coefficient  p r o v i d e s an i n d e x o f t h e d i s p a r i t y o f r e s p o n s e r a t e s two  The  between  a g e - g r o u p s f o r i t e m s c o n s i d e r e d more t y p i c a l o f e a c h  category as w e l l categories The First,  as reduce i n f l a t e d c o r r e l a t i o n s  with o u t l y i n g  tabled  5-year o l d s  scores.  c o r r e l a t i o n s h i g h l i g h t two m a i n  response r a t e s  i n large  b e t w e e n 3- and 4-,  findings.  3- a n d 5-, and 4- and  were s i m i l a r f o r each c a t e g o r y : F o r a g i v e n  category,  3-year o l d s '  responded  year olds  a s 4- a n d 5- y e a r o l d s t o e a c h o t h e r .  important f i n d i n g t o note  i s that  j u s t a s s i m i l a r l y t o 4- and 5The second  the c o r r e l a t i o n s  vary  Table 5 C o r r e l a t i o n s c o e f f i c i e n t s f o r e a c h c a t e g o r y and a g e - g r o u p p a i r b a s e d on t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f s u b j e c t s t h a t named e a c h i t e m .  Age Group  Pairs  Three  Three  Four  & Four  & Five  & Five  Clothes  .956* ( . 9 5 9 )  .927  ( .913)  .954 ( .947)  Playground  .937  ( .945)  .927  ( .946)  .917  Travel  .907  ( .892)  .900  ( .882)  .954 ( .939)  Zoo  .886  ( .855)  .857  ( .821)  .852 ( .827)  Kitchen  .741  ( . 385)  .742 ( .451)  .697  ( .311)  Restaurant  .551  ( .743 )  .553  ( .668 )  .903  ( .912)  Toy  . 320 ( .346)  .207  ( .175)  .391  ( .423)  +  ( .915)  * C o e f f i c i e n t b a s e d on a l l i t e m s named f o r t h a t c a t e g o r y . + C o e f f i c i e n t b a s e d on 20 most common i t e m s .  considerably across categories. p r o p o r t i o n o f s u b j e c t s naming categories.  o c c u r s because the  each item v a r i e d  across  Furthermore, i t r e f l e c t s the f a c t t h a t response  r a t e s were more s i m i l a r than f o r others. similar  This result  a c r o s s a g e - g r o u p s f o r some c a t e g o r i e s  F o r example,  response h i e r a r c h i e s  were  f o r a l l t h r e e a g e - g r o u p s f o r t h e c a t e g o r y CLOTHES ( s e e  A p p e n d i x D), b u t v e r y d i f f e r e n t  f o r t h e c a t e g o r y TOY.  Note  t h a t t h e h i g h e r t h e c o r r e l a t i o n t h e g r e a t e r agreement the  two  age-groups i n terms of which  exemplars of t h a t category. correlations  indicate  less  items a r e r e p r e s e n t a t i v e  Similarly, agreement  between  those with  concerning  lower  category  exemplars. Index o f Commonality.  Uniform responding t o categories  p r o v i d e s an i n d e x o f r e s p o n s e c o m m o n a l i t y Commonality  across  age-groups.  i s t h e complement o f d i v e r s i t y o f r e s p o n s e s .  If  most s u b j e c t s name t h e same words i n r e s p o n s e t o a c a t e g o r y (the  cue  commonality o f r e s p o n d i n g i s h i g h ) , the f r e q u e n c y  histogram/distribution w i l l contrast,  have  a marked p o s i t i v e  i f most s u b j e c t s name d i f f e r e n t  r e s p o n s e commonality  skew; i n  items f o r a category,  i s low and t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n w i l l  be more  spread out. I is  computed  N e l s o n ' s (1977)  Index o f C o m m o n a l i t y  t h e r a t i o o f t h e f r e q u e n c y o f t h e t h r e e most  responses f o r a category to the t o t a l ( t o k e n s ) named f o r t h a t c a t e g o r y . the  first  (IC) which  popular  number o f r e s p o n s e s  For the denominator,  only  t h r e e responses from each  s u b j e c t were u s e d t o compute t h e IC v a l u e  instead  of the  total  number o f r e s p o n s e s b e c a u s e y o u n g e r s u b j e c t s t e n d e d t o p r o d u c e  fewer responses subjects.  (than t h e r e q u i r e d f i v e ) than t h e o l d e r  IC v a l u e s can range from  larger values r e f l e c t i n g  one t o n e a r  zero, with the  more common o r s t e r e o t y p e d  responding  across subjects. Three IC v a l u e s — calculated in was  one f o r e a c h a g e - g r o u p —  f o r each o f t h e seven  T a b l e 6.  olds,  and a s l i g h t  Secondly,  c a t e g o r i e s and a r e p r e s e n t e d  The I C means h i g h l i g h t  an i n c r e a s e i n o v e r a l l  were  two t r e n d s .  First,  c o m m o n a l i t y between 3-and  decrease  there  4-year  between 4- and 5 - y e a r - o l d s .  IC r a t i o s v a r i e d c o n s i d e r a b l y a c r o s s t h e d i f f e r e n t  categories. A one-way ANOVA o f I C v a l u e s w i t h age a s t h e i n d e p e n d e n t variable  showed no d i f f e r e n c e s  1.156, M S  = .027.  e  a c r o s s age-groups, £(2,18) =  However, a one-way ANOVA o f IC v a l u e s  categories  as t h e independent  variable  difference  a c r o s s c a t e g o r i e s , F ( 6 , 1 4 ) = 12.755, MS  with  showed a s i g n i f i c a n t = .006.  C  T u k e y HSD f o l l o w - u p c o m p a r i s o n s r e v e a l e d s i g n i f i c a n t  category  differences  7.  i n responding  and a r e p r e s e n t e d  t h a t t h e c a t e g o r y TOY h a d a s i g n i f i c a n t l y all  i n Table  lower  Note  IC v a l u e  than  o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s ; i t a l s o had t h e lowest degree o f  commonality. Type/Token R a t i o s .  The complement o f c a t e g o r y  as r e f l e c t e d b y t h e IC r a t i o ,  i s category  d i f f e r e n c e between t y p i c a l i t y  and d i v e r s i t y  reflect  t h e d e g r e e t o w h i c h t h e same i t e m s  different  individuals  whereas t h e l a t t e r  diversity.  The  i s that the f i r s t a r e named by  (the peakedness o f t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n ) ,  reflects the diversity  of the d i s t r i b u t i o n ) .  typicality,  o f items  (the  spread  Above, c a t e g o r y d i v e r s i t y was a s s e s s e d  Table  6  Index o f commonality category.  values  Subject  Category  3-Years  f o r e a c h a g e - g r o u p and f o r e a c h  Age-Group  4-Years  5-Years  M  SD  Clothes  .534*  .742  .714  .663  .11  Playground  .562  .677  .691  .643  .07  Travel  .548  .696  .631  .625  .07  Restaurant  .350  .589  .519  .486  .12  Zoo  .473  .521  .455  .483  .03  Kitchen  .352  .430  .402  .395  .04  Toy  .175  .258  .210  .214  .04  M  .428  .559  .517  SD  .14  .17  .17  * I C = f r e q u e n c y o f 3 most p o p u l a r t o t a l # of r e s p o n s e s ( f i r s t  responses f o r a category 3 o n l y ) f o r each c a t e g o r y  49 Table 7 Tukey Comparisons: Differences For Each P a i r o f C a t e g o r i e s .  Clothes  Playgrd  i n Index o f Commonality  Travel Restrnt  Zoo  Clothes  .000  Playgrd  •020  n s  .000  Travel  •038  n s  .018  n s  .000  Restrnt  •177  n s  .157  n s  .139  Zoo  .180  n s  .160  n s  .230*  .003  n s  .000  Kitchen  .268*  .142  .091  n s  .088  Toys  .449***  .248*  *** .429  ns= non s i g n i f i c a n t ;  n s  Kitchen  Ratios  Toys  ' .000  n s  .411***  .272**  n s  .269*  * = p<.05. ; ** = p< .01;  .000 .181***  .000  *** = p<.001  i n t e r m s o f t h e number o f d i f f e r e n t  items  named f o r a g i v e n  category.  A more s o p h i s t i c a t e d measure o f d i v e r s i t y  type/token  ratio  different  (TTR)  responses  for that category responses  t h a t c o n s i s t s of the t o t a l  d i v i d e d by t h e t o t a l  (Nelson,  1974).  T h r e e TTR  t a b l e h i g h l i g h t s t h a t TTR  and  as t h e  independent  between a g e - g r o u p s . v a l u e s among t h e significant =  .002.  By  seven  difference  T u k e y HSD  the  To Pearson  higher  category  are presented  —  categories.  across values  TTR  A one-way ANOVA c o n f i r m e d  are presented as  i t s TTR  (more d i v e r s e ) t h a n  C  on  9.  age-groups.  values  The  on two  a  the  IC v a l u e s a r e  two  values  (r=-.926) w h i c h c o n f i r m s  that  response  l a r g e s t when  ( o n l y a few  e a c h w i t h a h i g h f r e q u e n c y ) , w h i l e TTR distributions  MS  a l l other categories.  calculated  a r e h i g h l y skewed  a  value i s  index complementary a s p e c t s o f t h e  Specifically,  out  i n Table  based  l a r g e s t when r e s p o n s e  8.  a wide range of  c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t was  named, b u t  for  a c r o s s c a t e g o r i e s , F ( 6 , 1 4 ) = 38.388,  v a l u e s and  distributions  one  difference  TTR  IC v a l u e s  zero  i n Table  a s s e s s t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between IC and  distribution. response  per  c o n t r a s t , t h e r e was  were h i g h l y n e g a t i v e l y c o r r e l a t e d and  i t approaches  v a r i a b l e showed no  v a l u e s p a i r e d a c r o s s c a t e g o r i e s and  TTR  when a l l  A one-way ANOVA on TTR  c a t e g o r y TOYS s t a n d s o u t  significantly  one  f o l l o w - u p c o m p a r i s o n s were c a r r i e d  t h e mean c a t e g o r y TTR Again,  equals  values are q u i t e s i m i l a r  a g e - g r o u p s f o r most c a t e g o r i e s . w i t h age  TTR  responses  responses.  v a l u e s were c a l c u l a t e d  each of the t h r e e age-groups —  number o f  number o f  t o a c a t e g o r y o c c u r o n l y o n c e , and  when a l l s u b j e c t s g i v e t h e same  The  The  is a  are very  flat  items  values  are  (many  items  Table  8  Type/Token  Ratios  For Categories  Subject  Category  3-Years  and A c r o s s  Age-groups.  Age-group  4-Years  5-Years  _M  SD  Travel  .267*  .200  .172  .213  .05  Clothes  .256  .174  .217  .216  .04  Kitchen  .346  .275  .293  .305  .04  Zoo  . 308  .290  . 324  .307  .02  Playground  .437  .362  .349  .383  .05  Restaurant  .500  .407  .386  .431  .06  Toy  .706  .633  .645  .661  .04  M  .403  .334  .341  SD  .16  .15  .15  *TTR = it o f d i f f e r e n t r e s p o n s e s f o r one c a t e g o r y t o t a l # o f r e s p o n s e s f o r one c a t e g o r y  52 Table  9  Tukey c o m p a r i s o n s : Mean d i f f e r e n c e i n t y p e / t o k e n r a t i o s f o r each p a i r o f c a t e g o r i e s .  Toys  Restrnt  Playgrd  Zoo  Kitchen  Clothes  Toy  .000  Restrnt  .230***  .000  Playgrd  .278***  .048  n s  .000  Zoo  .354***  .124  n s  •076  n s  .000  Kitchen  .356***  .126*  .078  n s  .002  n s  .000  Clothes  .445***  .215***  .167**  .091  n s  .089  n s  .000  Travel  .448***  .218***  .170**  .043  n s  •092  n s  .003  ns= non s i g n i f i c a n t ;  * = p<.05.; ** = p<. 01;  Travel  n s  **.* = p<.001  .000  53  b e i n g named, b u t each w i t h a low f r e q u e n c y ) . T y p i c a l i t y / d i v e r s i t y r a t i o (TDR).  The IC and TTR p r o v i d e  u s e f u l d e s c r i p t i o n s o f c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n norms. t h e s e norms a r e used, e x p e r i m e n t e r s  o f t e n want t o s e l e c t  with d i f f e r e n t production frequencies — and o t h e r s more f r e q u e n t l y .  B u t , when  some t h a t o c c u r  items rarely  F o r t h i s purpose i t i s more u s e f u l  t o have an index t h a t p r o v i d e s a more complete d e s c r i p t i o n o f a c a t e g o r y than e i t h e r t h e IC o r TTR a l o n e .  The TDR p r o v i d e s  such a d e s c r i p t i o n . One p o s s i b l e way o f combining average t h e two values..  IC and TTR r a t i o s i s t o  The problem w i t h t h i s , however, i s  t h a t t h e same average may be a c h i e v e d e i t h e r when IC i s h i g h and TTR i s low, o r v i c e v e r s a .  I n o t h e r words, t h e v a l u e  r e s u l t i n g from a v e r a g i n g IC and TTR v a l u e s i s n o t u n i q u e l y determined.  T h e r e f o r e , a u s e f u l c o m b i n a t i o n o f IC and TTR  v a l u e s i s a t y p i c a l i t y / d i v e r s i t y r a t i o (TDR). be formed two ways:  T h i s r a t i o can  One i s t o d i v i d e TTR v a l u e s by IC v a l u e s ,  and t h e o t h e r i s t o d i v i d e IC v a l u e s by TTR v a l u e s .  For the  p r e s e n t s t u d y , I used IC v a l u e s ( t y p i c a l i t y ) f o r t h e numerator and TTR v a l u e s ( d i v e r s i t y ) f o r t h e denominator.  I selected  t h i s r a t i o because I wanted t h e TDRs t o i n c r e a s e as c a t e g o r y t y p i c a l i t y increased s i n c e t y p i c a l i t y i s the c r u c i a l f a c t o r i n s e l e c t i n g items f o r a developmental few good c a t e g o r y exemplars, a c r o s s age-groups).  p r i m i n g study ( w i t h o u t a  few comparisons c o u l d be made  A comprehensive range of p r o d u c t i o n  f r e q u e n c i e s f o r a c a t e g o r y o c c u r s when TTR and IC a r e about t h e same.  I n t h i s c a s e , t h e TDR f o r a c a t e g o r y w i l l be about one.  I f t h e TDR v a l u e i s l e s s than 1 t h e c a t e g o r y i s more d i v e r s e  than  typical,  typical  1, t h e c a t e g o r y  10 i l l u s t r a t e s  categories, revealed  t h e d i f f e r e n c e s i n TDR v a l u e s  and a c r o s s t h e a g e - g r o u p s .  no o v e r a l l  age e f f e c t ,  F ( 6 , 1 4 ) = 9.508, MS were c a r r i e d presented  =  e  .340.  F ( 2 , 1 8 ) = 1.105, M S  Follow-up  11.  any o f t h e o t h e r  have a s l o w , b u t s t e a d y , illustrated  the  comparisons  i n the histographs  i n Appendix  frequency  significantly  d r o p - o f f i n response  higher  rates.  TDR they  This i s  of the categories  D. Discussion  g e n e r a l purpose o f t h i s  different  T u k e y HSD  categories indicating that  General The  forcategories,  N o t e t h a t t h e c a t e g o r i e s CLOTHES and  TRAVEL a r e t h e o n l y c a t e g o r i e s w i t h  presented  = 1.195.  e  o u t on t h e mean TDRs o f t h e c a t e g o r i e s and a r e  i n Table  values than  across  A one-way ANOVA on TDRs  c o n t r a s t , t h e r e was an o v e r a l l main e f f e c t  clearly  i s more  than d i v e r s e .  Table  By  but i f i t i s g r e a t e r than  study  was t o c o l l e c t  w i t h w h i c h p r e s c h o o l e r s name i t e m s  categories.  R e s u l t s a r e summarized  from  d a t a on seven  i n t e r m s o f age  d i f f e r e n c e s and c a t e g o r y d i f f e r e n c e s . Age  differences.  The o n l y s i g n i f i c a n t  that  3 - y e a r o l d s named f e w e r i t e m s  This  i s an i m p o r t a n t  than  d i f f e r e n c e t o note  age d i f f e r e n c e was  4- and 5 - y e a r o l d s . with  respect to priming  s t u d i e s b e c a u s e i f one s u b j e c t g r o u p does n o t name as many items  as t h e o t h e r g r o u p s , t h e y  priming here  (i.e.,  are also less  likely  name a s many s t u d i e d t a r g e t i t e m s ) .  b e i n g t h a t t h e more i t e m s  named, t h e i n c r e a s e d  o f naming t a r g e t words due t o c h a n c e . naming more i t e m s may e x h i b i t  t o show The  reason  likelihood  T h i s means t h a t a g r o u p  an e x a g g e r a t e d  level  o f memory  Table  10  Typicality/Diversity Groups .  Ratio  for Categories  Subject  Category  3-Years  and A c r o s s  Age-  Age-group  4-Years  5-Years  _M  SD  Clothes  2.09*  4.26  3.29  3.21  1.09  Travel  2.05  3.48  3.67  3.07  .88  Playground  1.27  1.87  1.98  1.71  .38  Zoo  1.54  1.70  1.40  1.55  .15  Kitchen  1.02  1.56  1.37  1.32  .27  Restaurant  .70  1.45  1.34  1.16  .41  Toy  .25  .41  .33  .33  .08  M  1.27  2.10  1.91  .68  1.31  1.18  SD  *TDR = Index o f Commonality R a t i o Type/Token R a t i o  56 T a b l e 11 Tukey C o m p a r i s o n s : Mean D i f f e r e n c e s i n T y p i c a l i t y / d i v e r s i t y R a t i o s F o r Each P a i r o f C a t e g o r i e s .  Clothes  Clothes  0.00  Travel  0.  1 4  Playgrd  1.  5 0  Zoo  Travel  Playgrd  ns  0 .00  ns  1 .36  n s  0. 00  1. 66*  1.52  n s  0. 1 6  Kitchen  1. 89*  1 .75  0.  Restrnt  2.  **  1 .91*  0. 5 5  Toys  2.  ***  2. 7 4 * * *  1.  05 88  ns= non s i g n i f i c a n t ;  3 9  3 8  n s  ns n s  ns  Zoo  Kitchen  Restrnt  0. 00 0. 2 3  n s  0. 00  ns  0. 1 6  0. 9 9 n s  1. 2 2  0.  3 9  n s  0.00  n s  0.83  n s  * = p<.05.; ** = p<.01; *** = p<.001  Toys  57  performance compared t o groups naming, on average, fewer Differences across categories.  The  items.  v a r i o u s methods of  a s s e s s i n g c a t e g o r i e s r e v e a l e d s e v e r a l d i f f e r e n c e s among them. These d i f f e r e n c e s w i l l be d i s c u s s e d  i n d i v i d u a l l y , and  following  each w i l l be a recommendation f o r which c a t e g o r i e s are s u i t e d f o r a developmental priming One was  study based on t h a t method.  measure t h a t v a r i e d s i g n i f i c a n t l y across  categories  the average number of d i f f e r e n t items named per 3).  (see Table  category  Note, however, t h a t these category  were s i m i l a r across the age-groups.  differences  T h i s can be seen i n a  ranking of the c a t e g o r i e s by the number of d i f f e r e n t which was  the same f o r a l l age-groups.  The  c a t e g o r i e s KITCHEN and  e i t h e r f o u r t h or f i f t h ,  TOYS, RESTAURANT,  ZOO  and the TRAVEL and  and  were i n v a r i a b l y CLOTHES c a t e g o r i e s  always had the fewest number of d i f f e r e n t items. c o n s i s t e n t ranking  items  In order from most  d i f f e r e n t items t o l e a s t , the ranking was PLAYGROUND.  best  The  of c a t e g o r i e s with r e s p e c t t o the number of  d i f f e r e n t items named suggests t h a t the r e l a t i v e amount of knowledge or f a m i l i a r i t y with d i f f e r e n t c a t e g o r i e s was s i m i l a r across  age-groups.  In d e c i d i n g which c a t e g o r i e s are best s u i t e d f o r a developmental priming First,  must keep two  c a t e g o r i e s with many d i f f e r e n t items may  they may it  study, one  have few  impossible  p o i n t s i n mind. be too l a r g e ;  items t h a t are t y p i c a l exemplars which make  f o r priming  performance to r i s e above the  Second, c a t e g o r i e s t h a t c o n s i s t of mainly t y p i c a l  floor.  category  exemplars ( i . e . , they are very small) w i l l r e s u l t i n too many t a r g e t items being named i n the b a s e l i n e c o n d i t i o n .  Such  ceiling  effects  baserates  i f one i s u s i n g c a t e g o r y  a developmental  priming  study,  With t h i s  I  PLAYGROUND.  their  a c r o s s c a t e g o r i e s was  ranking with respect t o s i m i l a r i t y  across age-groups.  I determined  t a k i n g each category  this  and c a l c u l a t i n g  c o e f f i c i e n t b a s e d on t h e r e s p o n s e Table  5).  What  I found  l a r g e age d i f f e r e n c e ;  usually  a category  indicate  degree o f s i m i l a r i t y by a Pearson  with  o u t on r e s p o n s e  For t h i s  olds.  highest correlation values  across  suited  priming  f o r a developmental  criterion,  the categories best  developmental  priming  study  correlation  Since these  rates, higher  reason,  correlations  correlations  i n responding  between  the four categories with the a l l age-groups a r e t h e b e s t study.  suited  are:  correlation  3- and 4 - y e a r o l d s was  a g r e a t e r degree o f s i m i l a r i t y  age-groups.  correlation  the highest  the highest  f o r 4- a n d 5- y e a r  were c a r r i e d  rates  was t h a t t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s r e v e a l e d no  t h e same a s t h a t w i t h  coefficient  of response  r a t e s f o r two a g e - g r o u p s ( s e e  c o e f f i c i e n t between, f o r example,  Therefore,  by t h i s  f o r use i n a  CLOTHES, PLAYGROUND, TRAVEL,  ZOO. A third  the  criteria  CLOTHES, KITCHEN, ZOO,  A s e c o n d d i f f e r e n c e t h a t was f o u n d  and  categories  i ti s best t o s e l e c t  would s e l e c t t h e f o l l o w i n g c a t e g o r i e s :  two  because  effect.  size to select  c a t e g o r i e s t h a t a r e average i n s i z e .  and,  study  a r e t o o h i g h t o d e t e c t an e x p e r i m e n t a l  Therefore, for  are not desirable f o ra priming  d i f f e r e n c e a c r o s s t h e c a t e g o r i e s i s r e v e a l e d by  I C , TTR, and TDR v a l u e s  respectively).  (see Tables  I have ranked  6, 8, and 10,  t h e c a t e g o r i e s by t h e s e  criteria  (averaged listed to  across the three age-groups),  from  IC  IC and TTR v a l u e s  l a r g e s t t o s m a l l e s t , a n d TTR v a l u e s from  largest.  categories,  with  Note t h a t e x c e p t the rankings  Values  CLOTHES  f o r t h e t o p and b o t t o m  are different. TTR  (.663)  smallest  Values  TDR  Values  TRAVEL  (.213)  CLOTHES  (3.21)  PLAYGROUND(.643)  CLOTHES  (.216)  TRAVEL  (3.07)  TRAVEL  KITCHEN  (.305)  PLAYGROUND(1.71)  RESTAURANT(.486)  ZOO  (.307)  ZOO  (1.55)  ZOO  (-483)  PLAYGROUND(.383)  KITCHEN  (1.32)  KITCHEN  (.395)  RESTAURANT(.431)  RESTAURANT(1.16)  TOYS  (-214)  TOYS  TOYS  (.625)  (.661)  (0.33)  B a s e d on TDR v a l u e s , t h e most a p p r o p r i a t e c a t e g o r i e s f o r developmental and  r e s e a r c h would be:  CLOTHES, TRAVEL, PLAYGROUND,  ZOO. Evaluating the d i f f e r e n t  Several  c a t e g o r y a s s e s s m e n t methods .  d i f f e r e n c e s were r e v e a l e d by t h e d i f f e r e n t  a s s e s s m e n t methods.  From t h e s e , d i f f e r e n t  t e r m s o f w h i c h c a t e g o r i e s s h o u l d be u s e d were made.  The methods and t h e i r  were as f o l l o w s :  category  recommendations i n  i n a priming  study  r e s p e c t i v e recommendations  Number o f d i f f e r e n t  KITCHEN, ZOO, and PLAYGROUND; r e s p o n s e  items  named —  CLOTHES,  rate correlations  —  CLOTHES, PLAYGROUND, TRAVEL, and ZOO; and t y p i c a l i t y / d i v e r s i t y ratios  —  determine  CLOTHES, TRAVEL, PLAYGROUND, ZOO.  w h i c h o f t h e s e methods i s s u p e r i o r , i s t o v i s u a l l y  examine t h e r e s p o n s e presented  One way t o  d i s t r i b u t i o n s o f each category, which a r e  i n A p p e n d i x D.  First  CLOTHES b e c a u s e i t h a s c l e a r l y  we s h o u l d examine t h e c a t e g o r y come o u t on t o p a c r o s s a l l  60 methods and,  therefore,  'good' c a t e g o r y . a p p a r e n t why lists.  i t c a n be u s e d  In examining  First,  i t s items cover a l l ranges of response  b e i n g named by v e r y few.  item i s f a i r l y  it  was  o n l y recommended o n c e i t e m s named.  quite  rates,  flat;  but c l u s t e r  response r a t e s studies,  around  in this  very  The  While f o r priming  differences that  priming studies.  When I C  ( f o l l o w e d by TOYS) w h i c h i s also  w i t h t h e c o r r e l a t i o n s o f r e s p o n s e r a t e s on t h e 20 most correlations  year olds) to  .451  ranged  (between  from  3- and  items i s i n s u f f i c i e n t ,  developmental The  .311  5-year  suggest t h a t a s s e s s i n g c a t e g o r i e s based different  are  t h e c a t e g o r y KITCHEN  i n c o n s i s t e n c y a c r o s s age-groups  named i t e m s ;  number  response  are q u i t e s a t i s f a c t o r y  on t y p i c a l i t y  since  i t s distribution  f r o m h i g h t o low  a c r o s s age-groups  second t o l a s t  low.  apparent that  f o r developmental  v a l u e s were a v e r a g e d  on t h e  t h e 20-30% r e s p o n s e r a t e .  range  are  the h i s t o g r a p h f o r the  t h e r e were c o n s i d e r a b l e a g e - g r o u p  not d e s i r a b l e  ranked  a s s e s s e d i s KITCHEN  In examining  i t e m s do n o t r a n g e  bars  age-groups.  (by t h e method b a s e d  c a t e g o r y KITCHEN i t i s r e a d i l y  some  i s the response r a t e f o r  across  n e x t c a t e g o r y t h a t s h o u l d be  of d i f f e r e n t  is  the t h r e e age-group  item; t h a t  consistent  rates,  a l m o s t a l l s u b j e c t s and  Second,  of s i m i l a r h e i g h t s f o r each  The  t h e h i s t o g r a p h f o r CLOTHES i t i s  i t has c o n s i s t e n t l y b e e n a t t h e t o p o f a l l t h r e e  w i t h some i t e m s b e i n g named by  each  as an example o f a  (between  olds).  is  apparent often  4- and  From t h i s  5I  on t h e number o f  particularly  for a  study.  c h o i c e t h a t remains  r e s p o n s e r a t e s and TDR  t h e n i s between  values.  correlated  N o t e t h a t b o t h methods  resulted  in  recommendations f o r the  same c a t e g o r i e s .  important point to consider are  the  two  d i f f e r e n c e between t h e  i s the  case.  f o r the  two  b e t t e r shaped than the from h i g h D).  The the  frequency relative  type of  methods, one latter  my  categories  i f the  can  (i.e.,  i t e m s t o low  frequency  importance of t h i s  recommendation  Evaluating results  distributions  of  and  important,  overall. greater  i s not  for selecting  Overall, that  norms f o r s e v e n  children.  T h i s may  the  The  category  result  the response  categories  o n l y m i n o r d i f f e r e n c e s among  T h r e e f a c t o r s may  therefore,  with  depends  needed.  first,  i n f l u e n c e the  and  probably  are  likely  Older  exemplars than  v a r i e t y of exemplars because of t h e i r  most children  t o have  younger  i n o l d e r c h i l d r e n naming a exposure, or  greater  fewer  3-  naming  t o name more i t e m s  F u r t h e r m o r e , o l d e r c h i l d r e n a r e more l i k e l y experience  Appendix  critical,  c h i l d ' s growing vocabulary.  know more words and,  see  critical.  s t u d y have i l l u s t r a t e d  categories.  i s the  drop-off  sufficient.  t o skewed, w i t h  5-year o l d s .  are  values  age-group d i f f e r e n c e s .  present  items f o r the  TDR  the  former i s  difference clearly  i s t o use  f o r word p r o d u c t i o n  range from f l a t , 4-,  the  from the  items;  range of response r a t e s i s  method i s  not of  t h a t the  categories  no  ordered  a more g r a d u a l  However, i f a r a n g e o f r e s p o n s e r a t e s correlational  histographs  see  is  clearly  However, I do  PLAYGROUND, t h a t were  study f o r which the  Therefore,  very  If there  methods, t h e n  In examining t h e  c a t e g o r i e s , TRAVEL and  differently  on  two  values.  c o r r e l a t i o n a l method i s p r e f e r a b l e .  think this  is a  because c o r r e l a t i o n c o e f f i c i e n t s  much e a s i e r t o compute t h a n a r e TDR  qualitative  This  and  more t y p i c a l  exemplars because of repeated  exposure t o the  items. The  second  factor  affecting  response  rates i n category  p r o d u c t i o n t a s k s i s t h a t as language i s used communication,  t h e p r e s c h o o l e r may be more l i k e l y t o  i n c o r p o r a t e knowledge o f p r o t o t y p i c a l boundaries.  i n f o r m a t i o n and c a t e g o r y  T h e r e f o r e , s i n c e 3-year o l d s a r e l e s s  know c a t e g o r y b o u n d a r i e s , responses.  As a r e s u l t ,  larger vocabulary  and i n c o n t r a s t t o t h e e f f e c t rates,  increasing  i n more u n i f o r m  responses.  was n o t t h e c a s e w i t h t h e p r e s e n t s t u d y  .428.  category However, t h i s  since the  l e s s than t h e average  for  4- and 5- y e a r  The  3-year o l d s a l s o averaged  average  typicality  A third  higher d i v e r s i t y  ratings —  category production tests  items  from  t h e c a t e g o r y TOY, t h i s  low TDR v a l u e ; TOY h a d t h e l o w e s t  rating  (.214 a s compared t o t h e h i g h e s t w h i c h was  l o w e s t w h i c h was  diversity .213).  rating  overall  for this  d i s t r i b u t i o n may be t h a t t h e c a t e g o r y t o occur because c h i l d r e n toys.  For  c a t e g o r y had typicality .663) and t h e  (.661 as compared t o t h e  One r e a s o n  from  have a l o t o f  a very  highest overall  rates  i s the s i z e of the category.  example, e v e n t h o u g h c h i l d r e n t y p i c a l l y  .403  respectively.  f a c t o r t h a t may be i n v o l v e d i n r e s p o n s e  experience with  ratings  o l d s w h i c h were .559 a n d .517, r e s p e c t i v e l y .  compared t o .334 and .341 f o r 4- and 5 - y e a r o l d s ,  different  of the  v a l u e a c r o s s c a t e g o r i e s f o r t h e 3 - y e a r o l d s was  T h i s was much  typicality  likely to  t h e y may g i v e a g r e a t e r v a r i e t y o f  on r e s p o n s e  k n o w l e d g e may r e s u l t  typicality  more f o r  flat  response  i s f a r too large f o r a r e e x p o s e d t o many  I t i s possible that f o r a larger  category,  many more e x p o s u r e s typicality.  That  number o f i t e m s , individual  a r e r e q u i r e d f o r t h e development o f  i s , i f an i n d i v i d u a l f o r any o f t h e i t e m s  age  to stand outthe  must be e x p o s e d t o t h a t i t e m f a r more t h a n  w o u l d i f t h e i t e m was f r o m this  i s exposed t o a l a r g e  i s the case,  then  even extremely  a category with  one w o u l d e x p e c t  he/she  fewer items.  that with  If  increasing  l a r g e c a t e g o r i e s would h a v e a skewed  response  distribution.  children  and/or a d u l t s .  This requires i n v e s t i g a t i o n with older  Conclusion C a t e g o r i e s t h a t have s i m i l a r  response  groups a r e p r e f e r r e d f o r developmental a l l o w f o r more m e a n i n g f u l Furthermore,  f o r priming  r a t e s a c r o s s age-  s t u d i e s because  comparisons a c r o s s t h e age-groups. s t u d i e s i t i s p r e f e r r e d t o use  categories that are intermediate i n t y p i c a l i t y avoid c e i l i n g  and f l o o r  they  effects.  For t h i s  and d i v e r s i t y t o  reason  i t was  recommended t h a t c a t e g o r i e s w i t h h i g h e r TDR v a l u e s a r e s e l e c t e d f o r priming s t u d i e s because t h i s value takes the t y p i c a l i t y  and d i v e r s i t y  TDRs a r e a v e r a g e d likely  to select  o f category exemplars.  a c r o s s t h e age-groups then  The f o u r o f t h e s e v e n  examined i n t h e p r e s e n t  study  a r e CLOTHES, TRAVEL, PLAYGROUND, f o u r c a t e g o r i e s were s e l e c t e d i s presented  one i s a l s o  i n t h e next  of t y p i c a l i t y and ZOO.  more  rates  categories  h a v i n g t h e h i g h e s t TDR  t h e r e f o r e , the best mixture  both  I fthe  c a t e g o r i e s t h a t have s i m i l a r r e s p o n s e  a c r o s s t h e age-groups.  and,  i n t o account  values  and d i v e r s i t y ,  As a r e s u l t ,  these  f o r use i n t h e p r i m i n g study  chapter.  that  64  Chapter STUDY 2 —  Four  I M P L I C I T AND E X P L I C I T MEMORY I N PRESCHOOLERS:  WHEN 3-YEAR OLDS REMEMBER AS MUCH AS 5-YEAR OLDS. Over t h e l a s t that  implicit  each o t h e r . of  d e c a d e , a l a r g e number o f s t u d i e s have shown  and e x p l i c i t One c r i t i c a l  memory d e v e l o p  memory c a n f u n c t i o n i n d e p e n d e n t l y o f o b s e r v a t i o n i s t h a t t h e s e two f o r m s  differently  across the l i f e  span.  Explicit  memory i s a c q u i r e d i n e a r l y c h i l d h o o d , r e m a i n s s t a b l e a c r o s s adulthood,  and t h e n  Conversely,  decreases  implicit  i nlater  memory d e v e l o p s  remains i n t a c t w e l l i n t o  late  life  earlier  adulthood  (Salthouse,  1982).  i n c h i l d h o o d and  ( f o r review  see Graf,  1990). To that  explain this  implicit  processes factors —  pattern of results,  i t h a s been  suggested  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s m e d i a t e d b y a u t o m a t i c  that are i n i t i a t e d thetest  and guided  p r i m a r i l y by e x t e r n a l  s i t u a t i o n , whereas e x p l i c i t  memory  performance i s mediated by p r o c e s s i n g t h a t i s c o n t r o l l e d by s u b j e c t s ' g o a l s and s t r a t e g i e s t h e more d e v e l o p e d memory a b i l i t i e s  a subject's controlled processes  and s t r a t e g i e s  memory p e r f o r m a n c e . such  (e.g., C r a i k , 1983).  Furthermore,  —  Therefore, —  thebetter their  such as explicit  since cognitive a b i l i t i e s  as t h e s e g e n e r a l l y improve w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age, e x p l i c i t  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e s h o u l d a l s o Conversely,  i fimplicit  increase with age.  memory i s m e d i a t e d by a u t o m a t i c  processes,  i t s h o u l d n o t be a f f e c t e d by a n y c h a n g e s i n  controlled  processes, b u t by t h e p e r c e p t u a l aspects o f t h e  testing situation.  F o r example, when one h a s r e a c h e d  thepoint  a t which r e a d i n g i s automatic, determined  by t h e p e r c e p t i o n o f t h e t e x t :  u p s i d e down t h e y w i l l - than  how w e l l t h e y  read slower  i f t h e t e x t appeared  normal.  n o t due t o t h e s u b j e c t ' s a b i l i t i e s with p r a c t i c e ) ,  —  read  I f i t i s unclear or  and l i k e l y Clearly,  remember more -  this  effect i s  ( a l t h o u g h t h e y may  b u t due t o t h e t e s t s i t u a t i o n . are t y p i c a l l y  i s more  automatic  processes  processes  w h i c h means t h a t , u n l i k e e x p l i c i t  Furthermore,  more b a s i c t h a n  controlled  memory  performance,  i m p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s m e d i a t e d b y p r o c e s s e s i n t a c t very early these t e s t s typically light  in life.  of this,  by a g e - r e l a t e d i n c r e a s e s  with t e s t s of e x p l i c i t i t i s expected  performance w i l l  memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  t h a t i m p l i c i t memory  be c o n s i s t e n t a c r o s s t h e l i f e - s p a n  i n v e s t i g a t e these  of task induced  with  and 5 - y e a r o l d p r e s c h o o l e r s .  p r e s e n t i n g s u b j e c t s with v a r i o u s items  some e l a b o r a t i v e l y , study  situation.  I examined t h e e f f e c t  e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g on i m p l i c i t  memory i n 3-, 4-, by  possibilities,  In  test  p e r f o r m a n c e b e i n g a f f e c t e d more by t h e s p e c i f i c t e s t To  that are  T h i s means t h a t p e r f o r m a n c e on  s h o u l d n o t be a f f e c t e d  found  change  and e x p l i c i t  T h i s was done  and h a v i n g them  and some n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e l y .  conditions involved asking the c h i l d  study  Elaborative  t o name t h e t a r g e t  i t e m and a y e s / n o q u e s t i o n a b o u t t h e i t e m , whereas t h e n o n elaborative condition involved only asking the c h i l d the  item.  implicit  After  and e x p l i c i t  production test The  a child  s t u d i e d the items,  and a c a t e g o r y  abilities  I tested their  memory p e r f o r m a n c e w i t h a c a t e g o r y  q u e s t i o n I have a d d r e s s e d  cognitive  t o name  cued-recall test,  respectively.  i s whether t h i s development o f  h a s t h e same e f f e c t o r d i f f e r e n t  e f f e c t s on  66 implicit  and e x p l i c i t memory t e s t  performance.  Method P e r f o r m a n c e on t h e e x p l i c i t memory t e s t s t u d y was a s s e s s e d recalled.  i n terms o f t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f t a r g e t  P e r f o r m a n c e on t h e i m p l i c i t  assessed  i n terms o f priming.  that baserate  involved  comparisons.  a collection  The s t u d y  performance f o r t h e present selection  typically  based  is  adequate l e v e l s  on t h e f o l l o w i n g c r i t e r i a .  then  (0%).  of baserate  be  sufficient  developmental for  items  c o n d i t i o n , and t h u s , no  I f b a s e r a t e naming o f t a r g e t s i s on t h e t o d e t e c t because  to l i f t study  this  performance o f f t h e f l o o r .  imposes an a d d i t i o n a l  of materials:  Target  production rates could r e f l e c t  while  b o o s t may n o t A  important  criteria  i t e m s must h a v e  t h e same p r o d u c t i o n r a t e s a c r o s s a g e - g r o u p s .  familiarity  (100%) o r ,  f o r increasing  t h e naming o f t a r g e t i t e m s ,  the selection  baserate  I f b a s e r a t e naming o f t a r g e t  p r i m i n g w i l l be d i f f i c u l t  s t u d y may b o o s t  categories (see  First,  t h e r e i s no p o s s i b i l i t y  priming can occur. then  3  study.  t a r g e t naming i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l  floor  f o r carrying  o f category exemplars f o r p r i m i n g s t u d i e s i s  on t h e f l o o r  at ceiling  was  d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter  p e r f o r m a n c e on t a r g e t s must n o t be a t c e i l i n g second,  items  studies i s  sufficient  o f b a s e r a t e d a t a on s e v e n  m a t e r i a l s s e c t i o n ) t o ensure  The  memory t e s t s  C r i t i c a l t o priming  performance i s a t a l e v e l  out meaningful  i n the present  differences  roughly  Different  i nchildren's  w i t h words, and s u c h d i f f e r e n c e s m i g h t i n f l u e n c e  the p a t t e r n o f priming. c a t e g o r i e s and f i v e  items  On t h e b a s i s o f t h e s e c r i t e r i a , f o u r from  e a c h c a t e g o r y were s e l e c t e d f o r  67 use  as s t u d y  materials.  Materials. white l i n e  S t u d y m a t e r i a l s c o n s i s t e d o f 20 b l a c k and  drawings, each glued  t o an 8 b y 5 i n c h i n d e x  card.  T h e s e i t e m s b e l o n g e d t o f o u r o f t h e s e v e n c a t e g o r i e s from w h i c h norms were c o l l e c t e d  i n C h a p t e r 3.  The f o u r c a t e g o r i e s and t h e  s e l e c t e d t a r g e t i t e m s a r e as f o l l o w s : shoe, s h o r t s , and underwear); (bicycle,  bus, t r a i n ,  (bridge, climber, and  ZOO ANIMALS  i t e m was three  MODES OF TRANSPORTATION  t r u c k , and v a n ) ;  PLAYGROUND ITEMS  m e r r y - g o - r o u n d , t e e t e r - t o t t e r , and  (bear,  giraffe,  frequency  (i.e.,  of occurrence  than 60%), occurrence  frequencies  g r o u p s , and e a c h i t e m  was r e p r e s e n t a b l e  Subjects.  i n t h e norms was n o t  were s i m i l a r  (i.e., across  n o t more age  as a p i c t u r e ( t h e  a r e i n Appendix E ) .  Subjects  daycare c e n t e r s .  Each  3 according t o  n o t l e s s t h a n 10%) o r c e i l i n g  selected materials  tires);  k a n g a r o o , monkey, t i g e r ) .  s e l e c t e d f r o m t h e norms i n C h a p t e r  criteria:  at f l o o r  CLOTHES ( d r e s s , h a t ,  were p r e s c h o o l e r s  from Vancouver  area  T h e r e were 12 c h i l d r e n i n e a c h g r o u p o f 3-  year  olds  (Mean = 3.66 y e a r s ;  r a n g e = 3.33 t o 3.92 y e a r s ) ,  year  olds  (Mean = 4.42  r a n g e = 4.0 t o 4.83 y e a r s ) , and  5-year o l d s  (Mean = 5.35; range = 5.0 t o 5.92  Procedure. instruction,  years;  T h e r e were t h r e e  study,  s u b j e c t s were t o l d  and t e s t .  read  years).  phases i n t h e experiment:  During  the instruction  phase  t h a t t h e y would be shown some p i c t u r e s and  a s k e d one o r two q u e s t i o n s told that after  4-  about e a c h p i c t u r e .  They were a l s o  l o o k i n g a t t h e p i c t u r e s a few s t o r i e s would be  t o them f o l l o w e d  f i n i s h the story.  by a q u e s t i o n  t h a t w o u l d h e l p them t o  The c h i l d r e n were n o t i n f o r m e d  about t h e  68 l a t e r memory During items  the study  (five  items,  tests.  items  those  from  from  p h a s e s u b j e c t s were p r e s e n t e d e a c h o f two c a t e g o r i e s ) .  one c a t e g o r y , were p r e s e n t e d  with t e n  Five of the i n a condition  ( n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e ) t h a t r e q u i r e d naming e a c h p i c t u r e ; five  i t e m s were p r e s e n t e d  asked  The  i n a condition (elaborative) that  q u e s t i o n s f o c u s s i n g on r e a l - l i f e  (e.g.,  1 1  first  was f r o m  an i t e m was f r o m  the other category,  and s o o n .  example, t h e e l a b o r a t i v e s t u d y be one from  experimental items  from  were u s e d  T h i s method  c o n d i t i o n , t h e next  item  ensured  condition.  for  item would The o r d e r o f  Across subjects,  t h a t a l l i t e m s were s t u d i e d i n e a c h  condition equally often.  F o r each s u b j e c t , t h e  two c a t e g o r i e s were n o t p r e s e n t e d t o assess baserate performance.  e a c h c a t e g o r y was u s e d  f a s h i o n so  and t h e second  i t e m s w i t h i n e a c h c a t e g o r y was random. ensured  s e e A p p e n d i x E) .  w i t h a n i t e m t h a t was i n ,  the non-elaborative study  counterbalancing  of the item  i n an a l t e r n a t i n g  one c a t e g o r y ,  t h a t when s u b j e c t s were p r e s e n t e d  the  aspects/uses  "Do b o y s wear d r e s s e s ? ; f o r q u e s t i o n s  s e t o f 10 i t e m s was p r e s e n t e d  that  the other  f o r study;  they  Across subjects,  e q u a l l y o f t e n i n t h e e x p e r i m e n t a l and  baserate conditions. The  test  phase immediately  followed t h e study  c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n t e s t was g i v e n f i r s t ; trials,  one f o r e a c h c a t e g o r y .  experimenter categories  read  a brief  the category  The  i t involved four  F o r each t r i a l , t h e  s t o r y r e l e v a n t t o one o f t h e  ( s e e A p p e n d i x A) and t h e n  t h e s u b j e c t t o name i t e m s  phase.  from  asked  a question  the category.  requiring  F o r example, f o r  ZOO ANIMALS t h e s t o r y was a b o u t a l i t t l e  boy/girl  that visited asked  t h e zoo.  what k i n d  After hearing the story,  o f a n i m a l s he/she thought  t h e s t o r y saw a t t h e z o o . t o 5 items p e r c a t e g o r y .  The c h i l d was e n c o u r a g e d  were p r o d u c e d , experimenter  after  t o name up  I f a s u b j e c t had d i f f i c u l t y  (see Appendix A ) .  was  the protagonist of  5 i t e m s t h e n an a l t e r n a t i v e q u e s t i o n was u s e d naming i t e m s  the c h i l d  to  producing  encourage  R e g a r d l e s s o f how few i t e m s  reading the a l t e r n a t i v e questions, the  went on t o t h e n e x t s t o r y .  Two o f t h e t e s t  trials  f o c u s e d on s t u d i e d c a t e g o r i e s and two f o c u s e d on b a s e r a t e categories. order:  T h e y were a l w a y s  Baserate  (elaborative),  administered i n the following  (non-studied category), studied  category  b a s e r a t e , and s t u d i e d c a t e g o r y ( n o n -  e l a b o r a t i v e ). The  last  p a r t o f t h e t e s t phase c o n s i s t e d o f c a t e g o r y  cued-recall tests.  C u e d - r e c a l l o f i t e m s from t h e two s t u d i e d  c a t e g o r i e s was a l w a y s  assessed immediately  production.  began w i t h i n s t r u c t i o n s ,  little might  The t e s t  saw? .  about  What were t h e names o f t h o s e a n i m a l s y o u  30 s e c o n d s .  a response  after  about  response  I f repeating the question d i d not another  30 s e c o n d s  p r o c e d u r e was r e p e a t e d f o r t h e s e c o n d lasted  f o r example, "A  T h i s q u e s t i o n was r e p e a t e d i f t h e r e was no  11  elicit  category  w h i l e ago y o u saw some p i c t u r e s o f a n i m a l s t h a t y o u see i n a zoo.  after  after  15-20 m i n u t e s  the questioning  category.  Sessions  f o r each s u b j e c t . Results  The target  critical  d e p e n d e n t measures were t h e p r o p o r t i o n o f  i t e m s named on t h e c a t e g o r y c u e d - r e c a l l t e s t s  proportion of target  and t h e  i t e m s named on t h e c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n  tests.  The  critical  otherwise stated. presented The the  alpha  main f i n d i n g s  from the  category production The  study condition  on  t e s t s are  i n the  the  as  both the  interaction, reason, the  are  implicit  and  than  these  F(2,33) =  2.452, MS  memory t e s t s . findings,  r e s u l t s f r o m e a c h t e s t t y p e were  test  as  triple  = 465.638, p=.10.  C  2,  overall  s t u d y and  f a c t o r s , showed a m a r g i n a l  and  non-elaborative  explicit  (ANOVA) o f  tests  1 and  fact that  a b e t w e e n - s u b j e c t s f a c t o r and  within-subjects  tables  shown i n F i g u r e  elaborative  o v e r a l l a n a l y s i s of variance age  unless  category-cued r e c a l l  f i g u r e s h i g h l i g h t the  higher  using  .05  F.  p e r f o r m a n c e was  An  set at  A l l a n a l y s i s of variance  i n Appendix  respectively.  l e v e l was  For  this  analyzed  separately. The This  explicit  memory r e s u l t s a r e  f i g u r e h i g h l i g h t s two  elaborative  points.  study c o n d i t i o n  increases  across  age  condition  3-year o l d s  the  memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  An  ANOVA o f  s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t f o r age, p<.001, w i t h 5 - y e a r o l d s  recalling  year olds  (53.08%).  recall  to study tasks,  of  olds,  explicit  t e s t d a t a showed a C  =  650.848, of  ( 6 4 . 0 8 % ) , and  of t a r g e t  items than  43-  a l s o a s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t  F = 4.158, MS  words r e c a l l e d i n t h e  study  5-year  a higher proportion  a higher proportion T h e r e was  as  is typical  F = 8.544, MS  recalling  non-  elaborative  i t e m s o v e r a l l (83.17%) t h a n 4 - y e a r o l d s  year olds  due  that  the  1.  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  Second, i n the  age-effect  i n Figure  i n the  p e r f o r m e d a l m o s t as w e l l  thereby eliminating  target  First,  explicit  groups.  presented  elaborative  C  = 917.081, w i t h more condition  target  (74.06%) t h a n  in  Figure 1 The Mean P r o p o r t i o n o f T a r g e t Words R e c a l l e d A c r o s s Age-groups.  A G E  STUDY  TASKS  El a b o r a t i v e N o n - e l a b o r a t i v e  the n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e c o n d i t i o n (59.50%).  More  t h e r e was  interaction,  3.615, MS  a significant = 917.081.  C  significant condition,  age  age  x study  Simple  effect  main e f f e c t s  year  (32.47%).  study  olds  condition  study  (84.50%) t h a n  T h e r e was  (73.75%) t h a n The  effect  from the o t h e r  also a significant  more t a r g e t i t e m s  age  than  supports  increases through  y e a r o l d s do  not  to  = 917.081,  i n the e l a b o r a t i v e  i n the non-elaborative c o n d i t i o n  due  to the  study  t a s k was  not  significant  groups.  the general  finding that explicit  the preschool p e r i o d .  performance i n the  3-  e f f e c t due  T h i s p a t t e r n of performance i n the n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e condition  5-year  4-year o l d s  3 - y e a r o l d s , F ( l , 3 3 ) = 11.176, MSe  recalled  (32.42%).  revealed a  4 - y e a r o l d s r e c a l l i n g more t a r g e t i t e m s  tasks with  p<.01, who  F(2,33) =  = 783.965, p<.01, w i t h  C  o l d s r e c a l l i n g more t a r g e t i t e m s and  analyses  only i n the n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e  F ( 2 , 6 6 ) = 10.427, MS  (61.58%),  task  importantly,  e l a b o r a t i v e study  spontaneously  More  study  memory  importantly,  c o n d i t i o n suggests  e l a b o r a t i v e l y process  that  3-  to-be-  remembered m a t e r i a l s , b u t when e l a b o r a t i o n o f m a t e r i a l s i s engaged by perform  means o f a s t u d y  as w e l l as  Figure  4-  2 presents  from c a t e g o r y  and  task, they  profit  f r o m i t and  5-year o l d s .  three d i f f e r e n t  production tests.  The  measures o f  bottom T i n e  i n the  absence of p r i o r  study.  show p e r f o r m a n c e i n t h e e l a b o r a t i v e and conditions. the bottom  The  named  u p p e r two  non-elaborative  I t i s t h e d i f f e r e n c e between t h e s e line  performance  i s baseline  performance which i s the p r o p o r t i o n of t a r g e t items category  can  (baseline) t h a t i n d i c a t e s the  two  lines study  lines  amount o f  per  and  priming  73 Figure 2 The Mean P r o p o r t i o n  of Target  Words P r o d u c e d A c r o s s  STUDY 0 A  •  Age-groups.  TASKS  0 Elaborative A  Non-elaborative Baseline  ( d i f f e r e n c e between b a s e l i n e and The  different  levels  experimental  of priming  performance).  shown i n F i g u r e 2  t h e d i f f e r e n c e between naming o f t a r g e t s i n t h e condition  and  study  of p i c t u r e s of the t a r g e t s ) .  shows t h a t t h e r e was by  priming  a l l s u b j e c t groups.  across age-groups.  An  i n a l l experimental  due  t o study  293.367, p=.009, w i t h more p r i m i n g  (9.38%),  (20.46%) t h a n with  no  other  l a c k o f an e f f e c t a g e - g r o u p s and  due  data  general  support  the  performance does not these  data provide  a f f e c t e d by  i n the  indicated  non-elaborative  p r i m i n g when s u b j e c t s were s i m p l y a s k e d t o name them, and required to process  study  But,  that implicit  =  C  study c o n d i t i o n  t h a t was  i n c r e a s e w i t h age.  a study manipulation.  revealed a  significance.  finding that i m p l i c i t  evidence  similar  e l a b o r a t i v e study  t h a t f o r a l l a g e - g r o u p s i t was i n the  figure  t a s k s , F_ = 7.537, MS  e f f e c t s approaching  e l a b o r a t i v e than  was  data  i n the non-elaborative  t o age  The  conditions,  Furthermore, priming  ANOVA o f t h e p r i m i n g  s i g n i f i c a n t main e f f e c t  condition  experimental  naming o f t a r g e t s i n t h e b a s e l i n e c o n d i t i o n  (without p r i o r  and  indicate  the  The  same a c r o s s  higher  i n the  condition.  These  memory more  importantly,  memory c a n  Specifically,  be  there  was  exposed t o the m a t e r i a l s  p r i m i n g was  and  h i g h e r when s u b j e c t s were  t h e m a t e r i a l s more  elaboratively.  GENERAL DISCUSSION The and  present  e x p e r i m e n t examined t h e e f f e c t s o f e l a b o r a t i v e  non-elaborative  recall)  and  performance. significant  implicit  study  t a s k s on  explicit  (category  memory ( c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n )  Category  cued-  test  c u e d - r e c a l l t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e showed a  a g e - r e l a t e d increase i n the non-elaborative  study  condition,  b u t no d i f f e r e n c e s a c r o s s a g e - g r o u p s when m a t e r i a l s  were s t u d i e d e l a b o r a t i v e l y .  Category  production  p e r f o r m a n c e showed h i g h e r amounts o f p r i m i n g study  c o n d i t i o n than The  study  cued-recall test  (e.g., K a i l ,  finding  1979).  condition explicit  type  task  o f p r o c e s s i n g which d i m i n i s h e s age-  I t a p p e a r s t h a t y o u n g e r p r e s c h o o l e r s do n o t  spontaneously their  that  I t i s interesting to  l a c k o f an a g e - e f f e c t i n d i c a t e s t h a t t h e s t u d y  effects.  engage i n t h i s  type  o f p r o c e s s i n g when l e f t t o  own d e v i c e s . The  implicit  literature  memory t e s t  results  ( e . g . , Greenbaum & G r a f ,  p r i m i n g was s i m i l a r  are consistent with the  1989) t o t h e e x t e n t  a c r o s s t h e age g r o u p s .  developed  depends on p r o c e s s e s  i n young p r e s c h o o l e r s .  t o be i n t a c t  very e a r l y  f o l l o w t h a t they underscored  here  are e n t i r e l y  was  the hypothesis  that are already well Although  these  processes  seem  q u i t e b a s i c , i t does n o t  automatic  i n nature.  This point  by t h e f i n d i n g t h a t p r i m i n g was h i g h e r  e l a b o r a t i v e than reasoning  and t h u s ,  that  Because p r i m i n g  same a c r o s s a g e - g r o u p s , t h e r e s u l t s s u p p o r t  that priming  is  the general  p e r f o r m a n c e d i d n o t change a c r o s s t h e a g e - g r o u p s .  engages a c e r t a i n  the  from t h e n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e  however, t h a t i n t h e e l a b o r a t i v e s t u d y  memory t e s t This  results  memory t e s t p e r f o r m a n c e i n c r e a s e s d u r i n g t h e e a r l y  pre-school years note,  i n the elaborative  i n the non-elaborative study c o n d i t i o n .  condition are consistent with  explicit  test  i n t h e n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e study  i n the  condition.  The  i s that elaborative processing i s a controlled  task, not automatic,  and b e c a u s e i t a f f e c t e d  performance i t f o l l o w s t h a t i m p l i c i t  implicit  memory  memory i s m e d i a t e d t o some  extent  by c o n t r o l l e d p r o c e s s i n g .  inconsistent with  While t h i s  some f i n d i n g s i n t h e l i t e r a t u r e  memory i n y o u n g c h i l d r e n i s u n a f f e c t e d processing study  (Naito,  finding i s that  implicit  by e l a b o r a t i v e  i n p r e s s ) , note t h a t t h e Naito  (in  press)  d i d n o t examine c h i l d r e n a s y o u n g a s 3 - y e a r s o l d .  However, t h e s t u d y results Graf,  found  1986).  e f f e c t on p r i m i n g  i s c o n s i s t e n t with the  i n s t u d i e s on new a s s o c i a t i o n s ( e . g . ,  Schacter  These s t u d i e s found  when new  increased  priming  &  a s s o c i a t i o n s were s t u d i e d e l a b o r a t i v e l y . To aspects the  understand these  results,  o f memory d e v e l o p d u r i n g  growing f a m i l i a r i t y  with  we must f i r s t the preschool  across be  implicit  the life-span  activated automatically.  i m p l i c i t memory i n t e r m s o f p r i m i n g  performance from  performance e l i m i n a t e s a g e - r e l a t e d as w e l l  with  explicit  as knowledge base. memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  c o n s i d e r t o what e x t e n t  i t would  increase t h a t can  assess  and s i n c e p r i m i n g  p e r f o r m a n c e , t h i s method o f a s s e s s i n g  size  i n terms  a r e more r e p r e s e n t a t i o n s However, most s t u d i e s  what One i s  size  Intuitively,  memory p e r f o r m a n c e s h o u l d  i f there  of s u b t r a c t i n g baserate  period.  words a n d v o c a b u l a r y  o f what c a n be a c t i v a t e d a u t o m a t i c a l l y . make s e n s e t h a t  consider  consists  experimental  implicit  memory  d i f f e r e n c e s i n vocabulary  Note t h a t t h i s From t h i s ,  the age-related  i s not t h e case  one s h o u l d  change s e e n i n e x p l i c i t  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i s r e l a t e d t o a g r o w i n g knowledge b a s e w h i c h i n c r e a s e s p a t h s t o t h e words m a k i n g r e c a l l i n g  target  items  easier. A second aspect during  the preschool  o f memory d e v e l o p m e n t t h a t i s a c q u i r e d period i s processes  that are s e l f -  initiated  and g u i d e d .  because as a c h i l d ' s  T h i s development i s important ability  increases,  so w i l l  controlled  processing.  memory t e s t hypothesis  this  processing  t h e i r p e r f o r m a n c e on t a s k s t h a t r e q u i r e By t h i s v i e w , t h e f a c t  performance i n c r e a s e s with  that  The p r e s e n t  Specifically,  study  age s u p p o r t s t h e  a l s o supports  when i t i s n o t n e c e s s a r y  controlled  processing  p e r f o r m a n c e was c o m p a r a b l e w i t h  this  hypothesis.  that a subject can s e l f -  (when t h e s u b j e c t i s engaged i n  e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g by t h e n a t u r e  of the task)  3-year o l d s '  t h a t o f 5-year o l d s .  a b s e n c e o f i n c r e a s e d p e r f o r m a n c e f o r t h e two s t u d y for  explicit  t h a t e x p l i c i t memory i s m e d i a t e d by c o n t r o l l e d  processing.  initiate  to control  i n this  age r a n g e , t o some e x t e n t ,  The  conditions  4- and 5 - y e a r o l d s may be e x p l a i n e d b y t h e f a c t  children  t o note  that  elaboratively  process m a t e r i a l s spontaneously.  I f the e l a b o r a t i v e study  c o n d i t i o n was more e x t e n s i v e t h a n  answering a yes/no  about a t a r g e t item, would l i k e l y  t h e o l d e r p r e s c h o o l e r s ' performance  h a v e a l s o been h i g h e r  the n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e The  then  question  i n the e l a b o r a t i v e than i n  study c o n d i t i o n .  c o n s i s t e n t and i n c o n s i s t e n t f i n d i n g s f r o m t h e i m p l i c i t  memory t e s t  p e r f o r m a n c e c a n be e x p l a i n e d i n t e r m s o f  processes.  Note t h a t automatic  not  a f f e c t e d by c o n t r o l l e d  processes,  processes.  t h a t t h e degree t o which a c h i l d ' s developed  automatic priming  processes,  nature, are  By t h i s v i e w , i t f o l l o w s  controlled  should not a f f e c t the automatic  means t h a t i f i m p l i c i t memory t e s t  by t h e i r  automatic  processes are  processes.  This  performance i s mediated by  t h e r e s h o u l d be no age d i f f e r e n c e s i n  a c r o s s t h e age g r o u p s , a s was t h e c a s e  with the present  78 experiment.  T h i s argument a l s o e x t e n d s  manipulation  of a controlled  elaborative versus process)  process.  t o t h e study S p e c i f i c a l l y , the  non-elaborative study  should not a f f e c t  implicit  conditions  memory t e s t  performance  (automatic  process).  experiment  a s p e r f o r m a n c e was c o n s i s t e n t l y h i g h e r  e l a b o r a t i v e than this  i n the non-elaborative study  mean t h a t i m p l i c i t  controlled by  T h i s was n o t t h e f i n d i n g  processes?  Schacter  and Graf  memory t e s t  (controlled  i n the i n the  conditions.  p e r f o r m a n c e i s m e d i a t e d by  T o answer t h i s  I will  (1986) t h a t f o u n d  r e f e r t o a study  implicit  memory  test  p e r f o r m a n c e t o be a f f e c t e d by e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g . reviewed brief  this  study  i n Chapter  two, and t h u s , w i l l  study,  S c h a c t e r and G r a f  e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g by h a v i n g associations  on  reading meaningful  and e x p l i c i t  and c u e d - r e c a l l t e s t s ,  of  (i.e.,  o r anomalous  words/sentences).  respectively. First,  S c h a c t e r and both  implicit  memory p e r f o r m a n c e f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s depended  elaborative processing.  processed  new  memory p e r f o r m a n c e w i t h word  (1986) r e p o r t e d two m a j o r f i n d i n g s . explicit  manipulated  levels of processing  or rating pleasantness  They t e s t e d i m p l i c i t completion  (1986)  s u b j e c t s study  OFFICER-FLOWER) a t d i f f e r e n t  words/sentences,  and  give only a  ( a p a i r o f words t h a t a r e n o t n o r m a l l y a s s o c i a t e d ;  g e n e r a t i n g words/sentences,  Graf  I  summary h e r e . In t h i s  e.g.,  Does  elaboratively,  That  i s , i f m a t e r i a l s were n o t  s u b j e c t s d i d n o t name t h e new  a s s o c i a t i o n s above chance l e v e l s . performance b e n e f i t t e d  from  meaningful  Schacter  relations.  Second, o n l y e x p l i c i t  memory  a more e x t e n s i v e e l a b o r a t i o n o f and Graf  (1986) c o n c l u d e d  that  the  first  result  i n d i c a t e s an u n d e r l y i n g c o m m o n a l i t y  r e s p e c t t o t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n v o l v e d i n both B a s e d on t h e l a t t e r "implicit distinct  result,  and e x p l i c i t  however, t h e y  types  with o f memory.  hypothesized  that  memory f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s d e p e n d on  and d i s s o c i a b l e  components o f t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n  e s t a b l i s h e d by e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g " . How i s t h e S c h a c t e r present  study?  and Graf  The c o n n e c t i o n  (1986) s t u d y  relevant t o the  has t o do w i t h t h e age o f t h e  s u b j e c t s and t h a t f a c t t h a t d u r i n g t h e p r e s c h o o l y e a r s a c q u i r e new words a t a r a p i d the study at  list  items  and t h e i r  priming  even w i t h o u t  because t h e items familiar reflect  many o f  names a r e new o r  In the Schacter  study,  elaborative study-trial  and G r a f  (1986)  t h e r e was some  processing  perhaps  were n e i t h e r v e r y u n f a m i l i a r (new), n o r v e r y  what one m i g h t e x p e c t  items  priming  In the present  (old) t o a l l s u b j e c t s .  familiarity  or with  a mixture  were s t r i c t l y  Therefore,  with  items  the present  results  of intermediate  of f a m i l i a r  and new i t e m s .  'new', we w o u l d have e x p e c t e d  i n the non-elaborative condition.  If  no  B u t , t h i s was n o t  case. I n summary, t h e p r e s e n t  evidence and  children,  t h e r e was no memory f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s w i t h o u t  elaborative processing.  the  For these  corresponding  least not highly f a m i l i a r .  study  the  rate.  children  experiment provided  t h a t there are important  e x p l i c i t memory t e s t  supporting  d i s t i n c t i o n s between  performance.  It illustrated  implicit that  w h i l e t h e r e may be some o v e r l a p o f t h e components u n d e r l y i n g t h e s e two f o r m s o f memory p e r f o r m a n c e , t h e r e a r e s i g n i f i c a n t differences regarding other underlying processes,  particular  80 those used the that  in retrieval.  h y p o t h e s i s put elaborative  target  item  forth  p e r f o r m a n c e depend on at  i n the  processing  (storage),  representation  Specifically,  but  implicit  retrieval.  experiment  S c h a c t e r and  establishes  different  the  and  Graf  supports  (1986) p a p e r  a representation explicit  components o f  memory  that  of  the  81 Chapter  5  DISCUSSION The  overall  g o a l o f t h i s t h e s i s was t o a s s e s s t h e  p r e s c h o o l p e r i o d development o f i m p l i c i t The  f o c u s was on t h e f o l l o w i n g  memory d e v e l o p d u r i n g t h i s  and e x p l i c i t  questions:  time,  How d o e s  memory.  implicit  a n d how i s i t a f f e c t e d  l e v e l s of processing manipulation?  How does e x p l i c i t  by a  memory  d e v e l o p d u r i n g t h e p r e s c h o o l y e a r s , and how i s i t a f f e c t e d levels of processing manipulation? develop  from  3-, t o 5 - y e a r s  by a  How does c a t e g o r y k n o w l e d g e  o f age?  The r e m a i n d e r  of this  c h a p t e r c o n s i s t s o f a g e n e r a l r e v i e w o f t h e major f i n d i n g s the normative brief  s t u d y and t h e main e x p e r i m e n t ,  discussion of t h e i r t h e o r e t i c a l  section  addresses t h e l i m i t a t i o n s  from  f o l l o w e d by a  implications.  The f i n a l  o f my r e s e a r c h a n d o u t l i n e s  future research directions. Review o f Research  Results  R e s u l t s from t h e n o r m a t i v e give  insight  i n t o t h e p r e s c h o o l development o f knowledge  c a t e g o r y membership. number o f r e s p o n s e s age, olds.  study d e s c r i b e d i n Chapter 3  w i t h 3-year  The most c r i t i c a l  The p r a c t i c a l  f i n d i n g was t h a t t h e  on c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n t e s t s  olds giving  fewer  implication  responses  of this  than  finding  increased with 4- a n d 5 - y e a r i s that i t  h i g h l i g h t s the importance  of careful  p r e s c h o o l e r s ' performance  on c a t e g o r y p r o d u c t i o n t e s t s .  Specifically,  have an i n c r e a s e d l i k e l i h o o d This  finding  interpretation of  r e s e a r c h e r s must be aware t h a t b e c a u s e  y e a r o l d s ' name more i t e m s t h a n  about  3-year  olds,  o f naming t a r g e t  i s important t o note because  4- and 5-  4- and 5 - y e a r items by  olds  chance.  i t could result  i n an  e x a g g e r a t i o n o f 4way  to adjust  and  for this  5-year  response d i f f e r e n c e  according t o the proportion responses, The  r e s p o n s e d i f f e r e n c e was  age-groups  i s to score subjects  i t e m s named o u t o f  s t u d y and t h i s  was  I e x p e c t e d t h a t w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age, might  d i v e r s i t y was  name more d i f f e r e n t  not s i g n i f i c a n t l y  the  different  across the  age-  I a l s o e x p e c t e d t h a t w i t h i n c r e a s i n g age s u b j e c t s  be more f a m i l i a r w i t h t y p i c a l  category  exemplars,  i n a l o t o f s u b j e c t s naming t h e same i t e m s .  t h e r e was  no t y p i c a l i t y  that  is little  age-effect.  although t y p i c a l i t y  and  diversity  the response  d i d v a r y a c r o s s the age-groups. h a v e had  suggests  That  i s , the t h r e e  i t e m s may  have been  that  note differ items  age-groups  f o r f i v e exemplars  c h a n g e s more w i t h r e s p e c t t o t h e f r e q u e n c y o f as opposed  must  r a t i n g s d i d not  i n d i c a t e s t h a t c a t e g o r y knowledge a c r o s s t h e  exemplars  However,  r a t e s of d i f f e r e n t  very high response r a t e s  given c a t e g o r y , but the a c t u a l This  While t h i s  change i n c a t e g o r y knowledge, one  a c r o s s t h e age-groups,  may  different  items, but category  resulting  there  total  the only age-related  found i n the normative  surprising.  might  of t a r g e t  One  r a t h e r t h a n by t h e number o f t a r g e t words named.  difference  groups.  o l d s ' memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  on a  different. age-groups  particular  t o the c a t e g o r y ' s response  rate  distribution. A second the d i f f e r e n c e Specifically,  interesting  finding  from the normative  study  i n response p a t t e r n s across categories. some c a t e g o r i e s had  few  i t e m s t h a t were named by  a l o t o f t h e s u b j e c t s and many i t e m s t h a t were named by few  subjects.  was  Other  only a  c a t e g o r i e s had many i t e m s t h a t were named  83 by most s u b j e c t s and  o n l y a s m a l l number o f d i f f e r e n t  T h e s e f i n d i n g s show t h a t c a t e g o r y across d i f f e r e n t perceived  being t y p i c a l  knowledge v a r i e s c o n s i d e r a b l y  categories; while  as b e i n g v e r y  some c a t e g o r i e s a r e  loose, with  no  exemplars with  representative of that category.  importance of t a k i n g i n t o account  one  i s using category  similar  distributions.  effects  from e x p e r i m e n t a l category.  required  f o r t h i s method, t h e  memory t e s t  p e r f o r m a n c e was manipulation,  former  e l a b o r a t i v e study  c o n d i t i o n than  study  The  from the e x p l i c i t  t h e r e was  study  with  c o n d i t i o n than  with  having  category data are  4 provided  explicit  d a t a on  memory.  First,  levels  of  The  priming  Second, i m p l i c i t  the  was  memory  processing  f o r m a t e r i a l s i n the those  i n the  non-elaborative  a l s o r e p o r t e d t h r e e main f i n d i n g s  memory t e s t s :  a main e f f e c t  an  categories  First,  t h e r e was  a  i n c r e a s e across the t h r e e age-groups.  manipulation,  t h e r e was  and  three age-groups.  w i t h more p r i m i n g  very  i s recommended.  f i n d i n g s were:  a f f e c t e d by t h e  condition.  to deal  However, s i n c e more s u b j e c t s  p r e s c h o o l development of i m p l i c i t  across the  way  a n a l y z i n g the  experiment described i n Chapter  main i m p l i c i t  t h a t are  i s t o separate  e f f e c t s by  by  a few  One  only those  A n o t h e r way  category  age-related  as  c a t e g o r y d i f f e r e n c e s when  production t e s t s .  d i f f e r e n c e s i s to select  similar  s t a n d i n g out  These d i f f e r e n c e s h i g h l i g h t  the  The  items  e x e m p l a r s , o t h e r c a t e g o r i e s a r e p e r c e i v e d t o have  a s m a l l number o f d i f f e r e n t  these  items.  f o r the  level  of  significant Second,  processing  higher performance i n the e l a b o r a t i v e study  i n the non-elaborative study  i n t e r a c t i o n between age  and  condition.  Third,  study c o n d i t i o n s .  Specifically, an  i n the non-elaborative  age-related  c o n d i t i o n t h e r e was  i n c r e a s e i n performance, while  e l a b o r a t i v e study three  study  i n the  c o n d i t i o n p e r f o r m a n c e was s i m i l a r  across the  age-groups. I n g e n e r a l , my f i n d i n g s a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h  implicit/explicit the  recent  of  implicit  children  memory d i s s o c i a t i o n t h a t h a s been f o u n d i n  literature.  The a b s e n c e o f an a g e - e f f e c t on t e s t s  memory h a s been f o u n d  (e.g.,  Parkin  i n preschoolers  & S t r e e t e , 1988).  general  memory, a s d i s c u s s e d finding  (e.g., Naito,  e f f e c t s on i m p l i c i t however, w i t h  i n press).  Levels of processing  new a s s o c i a t i o n s i n a m n e s i c s  1985) a n d h e a l t h y y o u n g a d u l t s  Schacter,  1986). increase i n e x p l i c i t the literature  Perlmutter  1974) and o l d e r a d u l t s  However, t h e l a c k o f an a g e - r e l a t e d s t u d i e d m a t e r i a l s , as d i s c u s s e d with  other  This  i n c o n s i s t e n c y suggests  &  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  on p r e s c h o o l e r s (Kail,  (e.g., 1979).  increase f o r elaboratively  i n C h a p t e r 4, i s i n c o n s i s t e n t i n press).  t h a t , t o some e x t e n t ,  explicit  i s c o n t r o l l e d by e n v i r o n m e n t a l  factors.  That i s , under d i f f e r e n t  conditions age-related increases i n  performance c o u l d have o c c u r r e d  difficult,  (e.g., Graf  s t u d i e s on young c h i l d r e n ( e . g . , N a i t o ,  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  condition.  noted,  (e.g., Graf &  was c o n s i s t e n t w i t h & Myers,  e f f e c t on  memory p e r f o r m a n c e have b e e n  age-related  different  i n C h a p t e r 4, w h i c h i s n o t a  Schacter,  The  and s c h o o l  What was  a b o u t my r e s u l t s was t h e l e v e l s o f p r o c e s s i n g implicit  the general  under a l e v e l s of p r o c e s s i n g  F o r example, i f my e x p l i c i t the levels  memory t e s t was more  of processing manipulation  may have  85 boosted  3 - y e a r o l d s memory p e r f o r m a n c e , b u t n o t t o t h e l e v e l o f  t h e 4- and 5 - y e a r Theoretical  olds.  Implications  In c o m b i n a t i o n , t h e s e r e s u l t s have i m p l i c a t i o n s f o r general theories of i m p l i c i t is  and e x p l i c i t  a d i s c u s s i o n o f how t h e s e r e s u l t s  memory t h a t were d i s c u s s e d and a c t i v a t i o n A systems  fit  memory.  What  with the three  i n C h a p t e r 2;  follows views  t h e systems, process,  views. a p p r o a c h f o c u s e s on t h e i d e a t h a t memory i s  composed o f s e v e r a l  distinct  systems w i t h a s e p a r a t e system  m e d i a t i n g e a c h f o r m o f memory ( e . g . , T u l v i n g ,  1985).  My  r e s u l t s a r e c o n s i s t e n t w i t h t h i s v i e w and t h e y s u g g e s t t h a t t h e systems m e d i a t i n g i m p l i c i t distinct  developmental pattern.  change i n i m p l i c i t  across the preschool  i t s u n d e r l y i n g system  by t h e age o f 3 - y e a r s .  memory f o l l o w a  The f i n d i n g t h a t t h e r e was no  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  period suggests that  related  memory and e x p l i c i t  i s fully  increase i n e x p l i c i t  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  How do t h e s e two s y s t e m s the system m e d i a t i n g i m p l i c i t  differ?  implies  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  subject-controlled.  age.  e x p l i c i t memory p e r f o r m a n c e its  Similarly,  likely  i s primarily performance  i t i s c o n t r o l l e d by t h e  and n o t by s u b j e c t - c o n t r o l l e d  develop with i n c r e a s i n g  suggest that  The f o r m e r i s p r o b a b l y f u l l y  d e v e l o p e d by t h e age o f 3 - y e a r s b e c a u s e environment  memory  that  period.  My f i n d i n g s  data-driven, while that mediating e x p l i c i t primarily  even  C o n v e r s e l y , t h e f i n d i n g o f an a g e -  the mediating system keeps d e v e l o p i n g d u r i n g t h i s  is  intact  abilities  t h e system mediating  develops l a t e r  r e l i a n c e on t h e s u b j e c t s ' a b i l i t y  that  because o f  to control the  86 processing.  A d d i t i o n a l support  f o r two d i s t i n c t  comes f r o m t h e f i n d i n g s s u g g e s t i n g e x p l i c i t memory t h a t i s a f f e c t e d mediating  mental processes  mediating  by a m n e s i a , whereas t h a t  process  v i e w s f o c u s on t h e  t h a t a r e i n v o l v e d by d i f f e r e n t  The p r o c e s s e s  inferred  t h a t t h e system  i m p l i c i t memory i s r o b u s t t o t h e syndrome.  U n l i k e t h e systems views,  tests.  memory s y s t e m s  study  t a s k s and  i n v o l v e d i n i m p l i c i t memory c a n be  from i m p l i c i t  memory t e s t s .  Such t e s t s  require  s u b j e c t s t o s a y what a u t o m a t i c a l l y comes t o m i n d upon t h e presentation of a stimulus.  Processes  memory c a n a l s o be i n f e r r e d f o r m o f memory.  On s u c h  consciously r e c a l l  from t e s t s d e s i g n e d  tests,  a prior  involved i n explicit  study  t o assess  this  s u b j e c t s a r e asked t o episode  s u b j e c t s t o have c o g n i t i v e c o n t r o l  over  and t h i s their  requires  retrieving  abilities. The  process  (e.g., Roediger  view advocated & Blaxton,  by R o e d i g e r  1987) p o s t u l a t e s t h a t  memory i s m e d i a t e d p r i m a r i l y by m o d a l i t y processes  (i.e.,  and h i s c o l l e a g u e s  specific,  bottom-up p r o c e s s i n g ) , w h e r e a s ,  memory i s m e d i a t e d b y c o n c e p t u a l - d r i v e n p r o c e s s e s down p r o c e s s i n g ) .  are l i k e l y  t o develop  r e l i a n c e on e x t e r n a l s t i m u l i thus,  explicit (i.e., top-  data-driven processes  p r i o r t o conceptual-driven processes.  abilities,  data-driven  By t h i s v i e w , i t f o l l o w s f r o m t h e p r e s e n t  results that sensory-perceptual,  processes  implicit  the reason  Furthermore,  earlier  data-driven  because of t h e i r  as opposed t o s u b j e c t - i n i t i a t e d why i m p l i c i t memory i s f u l l y  even i n 3 - y e a r o l d s .  Nevertheless,  the  memory d i s t i n c t i o n  implicit/explicit  develop  intact  while t h i s view can e x p l a i n i n terms o f d i f f e r e n t  mediating actually  processes,  i t does not  implicit/explicit a u t o m a t i c and Graf,  a type  of process  controlled processing,  1990).  An  l e v e l s of processing implicit  they  in  implicit  Chapter 4,  a levels  effect  Because o f the  the  study,  Related  previous  they  work by  t h a t when p r e s e n t e d subjects  with  may  e x p l a i n the and  the  study  with  o f some ( o r a l l ) i t e m s i n  Schacter  like  tasks that required elaborative processing  trial,  shown  i m p l i c i t memory e f f e c t  only  of the  F o r m a t e r i a l s t h a t have no  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n t h a t can  be  activated during  some f o r m o f e l a b o r a t i v e p r o c e s s i n g  paired  e s t a b l i s h a memory r e p r e s e n t a t i o n  (c.f.,  Graf  &  on  pre-  the  i s required  word  with  s u g g e s t s t h a t i m p l i c i t memory d e p e n d s  more t h a n mere a c t i v a t i o n . existing  items.  unrelated  study  finding  new  (1987) has  —  This  discussed  unfamiliar  pairs  words.  by  processing  However, a s  unfamiliar materials —  showed an  memory  trial.  have b e e n l e a r n e d and  of  automatic a c t i v a t i o n of  occur  novelty  Graf  finding  explicit  expect a l e v e l s of  can  of  affected differently  memory p e r f o r m a n c e .  materials. present  during  I d i d not  explain  A c t i v a t i o n v i e w s assume  memory i s m e d i a t e d by  such a view, on  are  manipulations.  pre-existing representations  effect  view which  r e s p e c t i v e l y ( f o r review  a c t i v a t i o n view can  p e r f o r m a n c e , as w e l l a s why  By  processes  performance d i s s o c i a t i o n s i n terms  a g e - r e l a t e d d i f f e r e n c e s between i m p l i c i t  that  these  function.  A c t i v a t i o n views are  see  e x p l a i n how  study  to  Schacter,  1987). The not  results  f r o m my  mediated e n t i r e l y  by  study  a l s o suggest t h a t priming  automatic processing,  but  was  some f o r m  of  e l a b o r a t i v e study maximum p r i m i n g  processing  effect,  was r e q u i r e d t o a c h i e v e t h e  and most i m p o r t a n t ,  o l d s were a b l e t o engage i n t h i s t y p e  t h a t even  3-year  of processing.  F u r t h e r m o r e , b e c a u s e o n c e t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n h a s been established  f u r t h e r e l a b o r a t i o n h a s no e f f e c t  memory p e r f o r m a n c e , t h i s v i e w a l s o s u p p o r t s implicit  on  the theory  memory i s p r i m a r i l y m e d i a t e d by a u t o m a t i c  Explicit  memory r e s u l t s  are also explained  A c t i v a t i o n v i e w s assume t h a t e l a b o r a t i v e  relates  a t a r g e t item with  p r i o r knowledge.  other  The e f f e c t  items,  that  processes.  by a c t i v a t i o n  views.  creates  implicit  processing  situational  o f such p r o c e s s i n g  c u e s , and  i s that i t  a d d i t i o n a l paths t o t h e r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and, t h e r e f o r e ,  increases the likelihood  o f an i t e m  being  explicitly  recalled.  T h i s means t h a t , i f 3-year o l d s a r e u n a b l e t o c a r r y o u t elaborative processing,  they  will  have fewer p a t h s t o t h e  r e p r e s e n t a t i o n a n d , as a r e s u l t ,  not r e c a l l  older  task  children.  guided  Since  the study  the elaborative processing  were e n a b l e d therefore, explicit  t o process  i n the present  o f items,  the materials  a s many i t e m s a s study  t h e 3-year  olds  e l a b o r a t i v e l y and,  p e r f o r m as w e l l a s 4- and 5 - y e a r o l d s on t e s t s o f  memory.  I n summary, my r e s u l t s , theoretical  i n combination with  perspective, suggest that i m p l i c i t  mediated e n t i r e l y  by a u t o m a t i c p r o c e s s e s ,  controlled  processes.  processing  i s necessary  When m a t e r i a l s  this  memory i s n o t  b u t a l s o by  a r e new, e l a b o r a t i v e  t o e s t a b l i s h a r e p r e s e n t a t i o n w h i c h may  t h e n be a u t o m a t i c a l l y a c t i v a t e d when some o f i t s components a r e presented.  89 L i m i t a t i o n s o f t h e Present Experiment Interpretation  and g e n e r a l i z a t i o n  t h i s work i s c o n s t r a i n e d by s e v e r a l t o be a d d r e s s e d by f u t u r e The most c r i t i c a l fact  that  and F u t u r e R e s e a r c h  factors.  These w i l l  —  category cued-recall  P r e v i o u s work h a s shown d i f f e r e n c e s tests  study c o n s i s t s in  of either  and c a t e g o r y  o f s t u d y phases  performance.  i n performance  f o r m o f memory.  another modality, e x p l i c i t  across  F o r example,  when a  i n one m o d a l i t y and t e s t  phases  memory p e r f o r m a n c e  i s similar i n  w i t h i n - and between- m o d a l i t y c o n d i t i o n s w h i l e i m p l i c i t performance  memory  i s higher i n within-modality conditions than i n  between-modality 1985).  have  o f my f i n d i n g s comes f r o m t h e  p r o d u c t i o n was u s e d t o a s s e s s e a c h f o r m o f memory  different  from  research.  limitation  o n l y one t e s t  of the findings  Because  conditions of this,  ( e . g . , G r a f , Shimamura, & S q u i r e ,  t h e i m p l i c a t i o n s drawn f r o m my s t u d y  must be t a k e n w i t h c a u t i o n u n t i l  similar  different  c a r r i e d out.  memory t e s t s have been  A s e c o n d a s p e c t o f my s t u d y t h a t  studies  limits  using  interpretation of  the r e s u l t s  comes f r o m t h e p r o c e d u r e u s e d t o s e l e c t t h e  materials.  I n o r d e r t o make m e a n i n g f u l c o m p a r i s o n a c r o s s t h e  different similar  age-groups,  performance  selection  I s e l e c t e d m a t e r i a l s t h a t would  yield  r a t e s f o r 3-, 4- a n d 5 - y e a r o l d s .  This  o f m a t e r i a l s may h a v e r e d u c e d  (or eliminated) the  possibility  of finding age-related differences  performance  a n d , t h u s , need t o be e x a m i n e d  i n baseline  further i n future  research. The  third  only involved  l i m i t a t i o n o f t h e main experiment i s t h a t i t a small  age-range  of subjects.  This  i s limiting  b e c a u s e one c a n n o t from of  only a limited  implicit  i n f e r the developmental age-range.  p a t t e r n o f memory  In order t o g e t a broader  memory d e v e l o p m e n t , a s i m i l a r  study with a  view  wider  range o f s u b j e c t s i s necessary. The  fourth limitation  number o f s u b j e c t s . females no  o f t h e main e x p e r i m e n t  Because o f t h e s e  could not balanced  perfectly  g e n d e r d i f f e r e n c e s were a p p a r e n t ,  balanced raise  i s the small  s m a l l n's, males and across the c e l l s .  While  a study with a w e l l -  d e s i g n w i t h r e s p e c t t o g e n d e r s h o u l d be c a r r i e d  the l e v e l  out t o  o f c o n f i d e n c e t h a t t h e r e a r e no g e n d e r  d i f f e r e n c e s d u r i n g t h i s age. The of  s m a l l number o f s u b j e c t s a l s o p r e v e n t e d  an o r d e r o f t e s t i n g  condition.  For both  the inclusion  the category  p r o d u c t i o n t e s t s and c a t e g o r y c u e d - r e c a l l t e s t s , the e l a b o r a t i v e study  categories i n  c o n d i t i o n were a l w a y s t e s t e d f i r s t a n d  those  i n t h e n o n - e l a b o r a t i v e c o n d i t i o n were t e s t e d  While  this  s h o u l d n o t be a p r o b l e m b e c a u s e o f t h e s m a l l  d e l a y between s t u d y effect  and t e s t i n g ,  the p o s s i b i l i t y  time-  o f an o r d e r  exists.  Future memory t e s t s different study,  second.  research should  and m o d a l i t y m a n i p u l a t i o n s .  tests,  as d i s c u s s e d i n t h e f i r s t  s h o u l d be c a r r i e d  results.  include counterbalancing Experiments  are limited  with  l i m i t a t i o n o f my  out because o f t h e v a r i a b i l i t y i n  S t u d i e s w i t h o n l y one o r two i m p l i c i t  memory t e s t s  different  and e x p l i c i t  i n terms o f g e n e r a l i z a b i l i t y t o o t h e r  tests. It  w o u l d a l s o be i n t e r e s t i n g  s i m i l a r t o t h a t i n Chapter  t o c a r r y o u t an  4, b u t w i t h  a modality  experiment manipulation.  B e c a u s e i t h a s g e n e r a l l y been f o u n d performance i s h i g h e r  i n within-modality  t o between-modality c o n d i t i o n s Standen,  that implicit  c o n d i t i o n s as opposed  (e.g., K i r s n e r , M i l e c h , &  1983) i t w o u l d be i n t e r e s t i n g  of modality  memory  t o s e e what t h e e f f e c t s  a r e d u r i n g t h e p r e s c h o o l age.  Conclusion T h i s t h e s i s examined c a t e g o r y explicit  k n o w l e d g e a n d i m p l i c i t and  memory d e v e l o p m e n t d u r i n g t h e p r e s c h o o l  I m p o r t a n t f i n d i n g s were r e v e a l e d f r o m b o t h production  normative study  development study  i n Chapter  Three important present  research.  category  i n Chapter  years.  the category  3, and t h e memory  4.  p o i n t s o f i n f o r m a t i o n r e s u l t e d from t h e  First,  the finding of differences i n  knowledge h i g h l i g h t t h e need f o r c o n t r o l l i n g  familiarity  with  items  across  s u b j e c t groups.  a n a l y s i s o f r e s p o n s e s showed how d i f f e r e n t  Second, t h e  indexes  provide  u s e f u l d e s c r i p t o r s o f s u b j e c t s ' knowledge o f c a t e g o r i e s . Third,  the normative data  study  e f f e c t i v e method f o r t e s t i n g young c h i l d r e n . abstract  Most i m p l i c i t  memory p e r f o r m a n c e i n  memory t e s t s a r e e i t h e r t o o  c a n n o t be p e r f o r m e d by most p r e s c h o o l e r s .  involved reading categories before  the children a story related a s k i n g them t o name i t e m s .  q u e s t i o n i n g more l i k e a t hand.  story-task insights  implicit  f o r 3 - y e a r o l d s t o comprehend o r r e q u i r e r e a d i n g and,  therefore,  task  and main e x p e r i m e n t showed an  Finally,  (i.e.,  into  a game and k e p t  to specific T h i s made t h e  c h i l d r e n focused  on t h e  t h e main e x p e r i m e n t showed t h a t t h e  category  implicit  My method  production)  memory i n young  also yields  interesting  preschoolers.  92 References B j o r k l u n d , D.F. & B j o r k l u n d , B.R. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . Organization versus i t e m e f f e c t s o f an e l a b o r a t e d knowledge b a s e on c h i l d r e n ' s memory. D e v e l o p m e n t a l P s y c h o l o g y , 21, 1120-1131. C a r r o l l , M. & K i r s n e r , K. (1982). C o n t e x t and r e p e t i t i o n e f f e c t s i n l e x i c a l d e c i s i o n and r e c o g n i t i o n memory. J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 21,. 55-69. Cermak, L.S. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . Human Memory and A m n e s i a . New J e r s e y : L . E r l b a u m and A s s o c i a t e s .  Hillsdale,  G a r d n e r , H., B o i l e r , F., M o r e i n e s , J . , & B u t t e r s , N. ( 1 9 7 3 ) . R e t r i e v i n g i n f o r m a t i o n from K o r s a k o f f p a t i e n t s : E f f e c t s o f c a t e g o r i c a l cues and r e f e r e n c e t o t h e t a s k . C o r t e x , 9, 165-175. G l i s k y , E . L . , S c h a c t e r , D.L., & T u l v i n g , E . (1986). Computer l e a r n i n g b y m e m o r y - i m p a i r e d p a t i e n t s : A c q u i s i t i o n and r e t e n t i o n o f complex knowledge. Neuropsychologia, 24, 313-328. Graf,  P. (1990). L i f e - s p a n c h a n g e s i n i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory. B u l l e t i n o f t h e P s y c h o n o m i c S o c i e t y , 28, 353-358.  Graf,  P. & M a n d l e r , G. (1984). A c t i v a t i o n makes words more a c c e s s i b l e , b u t n o t n e c e s s a r i l y more r e t r i e v a b l e . J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 23, 553-568.  Graf,  P., M a n d l e r , G. & Haden, P. symptoms i n n o r m a l s u b j e c t s .  Graf,  P. & S c h a c t e r , D.L. (1985). I m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s i n n o r m a l and a m n e s i c subjects. J o u r n a l of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and C o g n i t i o n , 11, 501-518.  Graf,  P. & S c h a c t e r , D.L. (1987). Selective effects of i n t e r f e r e n c e on i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory f o r new associations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, and C o g n i t i o n , 13, 45-53.  Graf,  P., Shimamura, A.P., & S q u i r e , L.R. (1985). Priming a c r o s s m o d a l i t i e s and p r i m i n g a c r o s s c a t e g o r y l e v e l s : E x t e n d i n g t h e domain o f p r e s e r v e d f u n c t i o n i n a m n e s i a . Journal of Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, and C o g n i t i o n , 11, 385-395.  Graf,  P., S q u i r e , L.R., & M a n d l e r , G. (1984). The i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s do n o t f o r g e t . Journal of Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, a n d C o g n i t i o n , 1ft, 164-178.  (1982). Science,  S i m u l a t i n g amnesic 218. 1243-1244.  93 Greenbaum, J . L . & G r a f , P. (1989). Preschool period d e v e l o p m e n t o f i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t r e m e m b e r i n g . B u l l e t i n o f t h e P s y c h o n o m i c S o c i e t y , 22, 417-420. Jacoby, L.L. (1983). P e r c e p t u a l enhancement: Persistent e f f e c t s o f an e x p e r i e n c e . Journal of Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, and C o g n i t i o n , 9, 21-38. Jacoby, L . L . (1983b). Remembering t h e d a t a : Analyzing i n t e r a c t i v e processes i n reading. Journal of Verbal L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 22, 485-508. J a c o b y , L . L . & D a l l a s , M. (1981). On t h e r e l a t i o n s h i p between a u t o b i o g r a p h i c a l memory and p e r c e p t u a l l e a r n i n g . Journal of Experimental Psychology: G e n e r a l , 110, 306-340. J o n i d e s , J . (1981). Voluntary versus automatic c o n t r o l over t h e mind's e y e movement. I n J . Long & A.D. B a d d e l e y ( E d s . ) , A t t e n t i o n and p e r f o r m a n c e IX ( p p . 1 8 7 - 2 0 3 ) . H i l l s d a l e , NJ: Erlbaum. Kail,  R.V., J r . ( 1 9 7 9 ) . The d e v e l o p m e n t o f memory i n c h i l d r e n . San F r a n c i s c o : W.H. Freeman.  K i r s n e r , K., M i l e c h , D., & S t a n d e n , P. (1983). Common and m o d a l i t y - s p e c i f i c p r o c e s s e s i n t h e m e n t a l l e x i c o n . Memory & C o g n i t i o n , 11, 621-630. K o l e r s , P.A. & R o e d i g e r , H.L. I l l ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Procedures o f Mind. J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 23, 425449. L i g h t , L . L . & S i n g h , A. (1987). I m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory i n y o u n g and o l d e r a d u l t s . Journal of Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, and C o g n i t i o n , 13, 531-541. L o g a n , G.D. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . S k i l l and a u t o m a t i c i t y : Relations, i m p l i c a t i o n s , and f u t u r e d i r e c t i o n s . Canadian J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l o g y , 39, 367-386. L u r i a , A.R. (1976). W a s h i n g t o n , DC:  The n e u r o p s y c h o l o g y o f memory. V.H. W i n s t o n .  M a n d l e r , G. (1979). O r g a n i z a t i o n and r e p e t i t i o n : Organizational p r i n c i p l e s with s p e c i a l reference t o rote learning. I n L.-G. N i l s s o n ( E d . ) . P e r s p e c t i v e s on memory research. H i l l s d a l e , NJ: Erlbaum. M a n d l e r , G. (1980). Recognizing: The judgment o f p r e v i o u s occurrence. P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e v i e w, 87, 252-271. M o r r i s , C D . , B r a n s f o r d , J.D., & F r a n k s , J . J . (1977). Levels of p r o c e s s i n g versus t r a n s f e r appropriate p r o c e s s i n g . J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g a n d V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 16, 519533.  94  M o s c o v i t c h , M., W i n o c u r , G., & M c L a c h l a n , D. (1986). Memory as a s s e s s e d by r e c o g n i t i o n and r e a d i n g t i m e i n n o r m a l and m e m o r y - i m p a i r e d p e o p l e w i t h A l z h e i m e r ' s d i s e a s e and o t h e r neurological d i s o r d e r s . Journal of Experimental Psychology: G e n e r a l , 115, 331-347. N a i t o , M. ( I n p r e s s ) . R e p e t i t i o n p r i m i n g i n c h i l d r e n and adults: A g e - r e l a t e d d i s s o c i a t i o n between i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory. Journal of Experimental C h i l d Psychology. P a r k i n , A . J . & S t r e e t e , S. (1988). I m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory i n young c h i l d r e n and a d u l t s . B r i t i s h J o u r n a l o f P s y c h o l o g y , 2 9 ( 3 ) , 361-369. P e r l m u t t e r , M. & M y e r s , N.A. ( 1 9 7 4 ) . R e c o g n i t i o n memory d e v e l o p m e n t i n two- t o f o u r - y e a r - o l d s . Developmental P s y c h o l o g y , 10.(3), 447-450. P e r l m u t t e r , M. & M y e r s , N.A. (1979). Development o f r e c a l l i n 2- t o 4 - y e a r - o l d c h i l d r e n . Developmental Psychology, 1 5 ( 1 ) , 73-83. P o s n e r , M.I. & S n y d e r , C.R.R. ( 1 9 7 5 ) . A t t e n t i o n and c o g n i t i v e control. I n R.L. S o l s o ( E d . ) , I n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g and cognition: The L o y o l a Symposium ( p p . 5 5 - 5 8 ) . Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. R o e d i g e r , H.L. I l l , & B l a x t o n , T.A. ( 1 9 8 7 ) . Effects of varying m o d a l i t y , s u r f a c e f e a t u r e s , and r e t e n t i o n i n t e r v a l on p r i m i n g i n word-fragment c o m p l e t i o n . Memory & C o g n i t i o n , , 15, 379-388. S a l t h o u s e , T.A. ( 1 9 8 2 ) . A d u l t c o g n i t i o n : An e x p e r i m e n t a l p s y c h o l o g y o f human a g i n g . S p r i n g e r - V e r l a g , I n c . : New York. S c h a c t e r , D.L. ( 1 9 8 5 ) . P r i m i n g o f o l d and new k n o w l e d g e i n a m n e s i c p a t i e n t s and n o r m a l s u b j e c t s . A n n a l s o f t h e New Y o r k Academy o f S c i e n c e s . 444, 41-53. S c h a c t e r , D.L. (1987). I m p l i c i t memory: H i s t o r y and c u r r e n t status. J o u r n a l o f Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and C o g n i t i o n , 13.(3), 501-518. S c h a c t e r , D.L. & G r a f , P. (1986). Effects of elaborative p r o c e s s i n g on i m p l i c i t and e x p l i c i t memory f o r new associations. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, and C o g n i t i o n . 12, 432-444. S c h a c t e r , D.L. & G r a f , P. ( 1 9 8 9 ) . Modality s p e c i f i c i t y of i m p l i c i t memory f o r new a s s o c i a t i o n s . J o u r n a l o f Experimental Psychology: L e a r n i n g , Memory, a n d C o g n i t i o n , 1 5 ( 1 ) , 3-12.  95  S c h a c t e r , D.L., H a r b l u k , J . L . & M c L a c h l a n , D.R. (1984). R e t r i e v a l without r e c o l l e c t i o n : An e x p e r i m e n t a l a n a l y s i s of s o u r c e amnesia. J o u r n a l o f V e r b a l L e a r n i n g and V e r b a l B e h a v i o r , 23, 593-611. S c h a c t e r , D.L. & M o s c o v i t c h , M. ( 1 9 8 4 ) . I n f a n t s , a m n e s i c s , and d i s s o c i a b l e memory s y s t e m s . I n M. M o s c o v i t c h ( E d . ) , I n f a n t memory: I t s r e l a t i o n t o n o r m a l and p a t h o l o g i c a l memory i n humans and o t h e r a n i m a l s ( p p . 173-216). New York: Plenum. S c h n e i d e r , W. & S h i f f r i n , R.M. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . C o n t r o l l e d and automatic information processing. I. Detection, search, and a t t e n t i o n . P s y c h o l o g i c a l R e v i e w, 84, 1-66. S h i f f r i n , R.M. & S c h n e i d e r , W. ( 1 9 7 7 ) . C o n t r o l l e d and a u t o m a t i c human i n f o r m a t i o n p r o c e s s i n g : I I . Perceptual l e a r n i n g , a u t o m a t i c a t t e n d i n g , and a g e n e r a l t h e o r y . P s y c h o l o g i c a l Review, 84, 127-190. Shimamura, A.P., & S q u i r e , L.R. (1984). Paired-associate l e a r n i n g and p r i m i n g e f f e c t s i n a m n e s i a : A n e u r o p s y c h o l o g i c a l study. Journal o f Experimental Psychology: G e n e r a l , 113, 556-570. S q u i r e , L.R., & Cohen, N . J . ( 1 9 8 4 ) . Human memory and a m n e s i a . I n J . McGaugh, G. L y n c h , & N. W e i n b e r g e r ( E d s . ) , P r o c e e d i n g s o f t h e c o n f e r e n c e on t h e n e u r o b i o l o g y o f l e a r n i n g a n d memory. New Y o r k : G u i l f o r d Press. T u l v i n g , E. (1985). How many memory s y s t e m s a r e t h e r e ? A m e r i c a n P s y c h o l o g i s t , 40.(4), 385-398.  96 APPENDIX A Category  Stories  and Q u e s t i o n s  Toys Story: One d a y a l i t t l e b o y / g i r l named L e e won a t r i p t o t h e b i g g e s t t o y s t o r e i n t h e whole w o r l d . When L e e g o t t o t h e s t o r e h e / s h e saw h u n d r e d s o f rows o f t o y s . Questions: 1) What k i n d o f t o y s do y o u t h i n k L e e saw i n t h e t o y store? 2) I f y o u went t o t h e t o y s t o r e , what w o u l d y o u buy? 3) What k i n d o f t o y s would y o u buy f o r y o u r f r i e n d s ? 4) Do y o u h a v e some f a v o r i t e t o y s t h a t y o u l i k e t o p l a y with?  Zoo Story: One d a y a l i t t l e b o y / g i r l named K e r r y went t o t h e zoo for the very f i r s t time. He/she w a l k e d up t o t h e s e v e r y b i g g a t e s w h i c h s a i d z o o on them. K e r r y walked through t h e g a t e s and i n s i d e h e / s h e saw h u n d r e d s o f a n i m a l s . Questions: 1) C a n y o u t e l l me what a n i m a l s K e r r y t h e y saw i n t h e zoo? 2) Can y o u t h i n k o f some a n i m a l s K e r r y m i g h t s e e i n some o f t h e c a g e s a t t h e zoo? 3) When y o u went t o t h e z o o what k i n d o f a n i m a l s d i d y o u see?  Travel Story: T h e r e was l i t t l e b o y / g i r l named K e l l y a n d h e r p a r e n t s t r a v e l l e d a l o t i n t h e i r town and a l l o v e r t h e w o r l d . Usually i t was t o v i s i t r e l a t i v e s ( a u n t s , u n c l e s , grandma, g r a n d p a ) . T h e y u s e d d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s t o r i d e on t o g e t p l a c e s b e c a u s e s o m e t i m e s t h e y d i d n ' t have t o go f a r , a n d sometimes t h e y h a d t o go v e r y f a r . Questions: 1) What c a n K e l l y ' s Mom and Dad m i g h t r i d e on t o v i s i t their different relatives? 2) What w o u l d t h e y r i d e on t o g e t t h e r e ? 3) I t s way t o o f a r t o w a l k s o what c o u l d t h e y r i d e i n s o t h e y w o u l d n ' t have t o w a l k ?  97  Restaurant Story: P a t i s v e r y happy t o d a y . H i s / h e r Mom and Dad d e c i d e d t o t a k e P a t t o a r e s t a u r a n t f o r d i n n e r b e c a u s e h e ' s / s h e ' s been such a good b o y / g i r l . So o f f t h e y went t o t h e r e s t a u r a n t . Questions: 1) When t h e y g o t i n s i d e t h e r e s t a u r a n t i t was v e r y b i g s o P a t saw l o t s o f t h i n g s i n s i d e o f t h e r e s t a u r a n t . What do y o u t h i n k P a t saw i n t h e r e s t a u r a n t ? 2) What do y o u t h i n k P a t saw i n t h e r e s t a u r a n t t h a t was not food? Something p e o p l e d o n ' t e a t . 3) I f I g a v e y o u a d o l l house t h a t h a d a r e s t a u r a n t i n i t , what w o u l d y o u p u t i n s i d e o f t h e r e s t a u r a n t s o t h a t i t looked l i k e a restaurant? 4) What do y o u s e e i n when y o u go t o a r e s t a u r a n t ?  Kitchen Story: E r i n i s a l i t t l e b o y / g i r l that j u s t loves going to grandma's h o u s e b e c a u s e E r i n ' s grandma a l w a y s l e t s h i m / h e r h e l p h e r i n t h e k i t c h e n when making d i n n e r . So when E r i n g e t s t o grandma's house t h e f i r s t t h i n g he/she does i s r a c e t o t h e k i t c h e n t o h e l p grandma. Questions: 1) What k i n d o f k i t c h e n t h i n g s do y o u t h i n k E r i n s e e s when he g o e s i n t h e k i t c h e n ? 2) What k i t c h e n t h i n g s do l o t s o f p e o p l e have i n t h e i r kitchens? 3) Y o u r k i t c h e n i s n ' t an empty room i s i t ? What k i t c h e n t h i n g s do y o u s e e i n y o u r k i t c h e n a t home?  Playground Story: One d a y a l i t t l e b o y / g i r l named C h r i s met a n o t h e r l i t t l e b o y / g i r l named D a l e . D a l e was s a d b e c a u s e h e / s h e d i d n ' t have anyone t o p l a y w i t h . To make D a l e happy, C h r i s d e c i d e d t o t a k e h i m / h e r t o t h e p l a y g r o u n d t o have f u n . D a l e was v e r y happy when t h e y g o t t h e r e b e c a u s e t h e r e were s o many t h i n g s t o p l a y w i t h and s e e a t t h e p l a y g r o u n d . Questions: 1) What do y o u t h i n k D a l e saw a t t h e p l a y g r o u n d ? 2) What do y o u s e e when y o u go t o t h e p l a y g r o u n d ? 3) A r e t h e r e d i f f e r e n t t h i n g s y o u c a n s e e a t t h e playground? L i k e what?  98 Clothes Story: One d a y , a l i t t l e b o y / g i r l named J e s s i e was h e l p i n g h i s / h e r p a r e n t s h a n g c l o t h e s on t h e c l o t h e s l i n e t o d r y . Then s u d d e n l y , a b i g w i n d came up and b l e w them a l l away. This meant t h a t J e s s i e and h i s / h e r p a r e n t s h a d t o go and buy a l l new c l o t h e s o r t h e y w o u l d have n o t h i n g t o wear on t h e i r b o d i e s . T h e y went t o t h e b i g g e s t c l o t h i n g s t o r e i n town and saw l o t s and l o t s o f c l o t h e s . Questions: 1) What k i n d o f c l o t h e s c a n J e s s i e ' s p a r e n t s buy s o t h e y a l l h a v e c l o t h e s t o wear on t h e i r b o d i e s ? 2) What a r e t h i n g s t h a t p e o p l e wear on t h e i r b o d i e s ? 3 ) When p e o p l e g e t d r e s s e d i n t h e m o r n i n g what do t h e y p u t on t h e i r b o d i e s ? 4) What k i n d o f c l o t h e s ? Can y o u t h i n k o f t h e names o f some c l o t h e s p e o p l e wear?  99  APPENDIX B Analysis of Variance  Tables  One-way ANOVAs f o r T a b l e 2 Mean Number o f R e s p o n s e s p e r C a t e g o r y . Sums o f Squares  df  Means Squares  Age Error  2.901 .879  2 18  1.451 .049  29.706  >.001  Category Error  .429 3.352  6 14  .071 .239  . 298  .928  Source  F-Ratio  P  One-way ANOVAs f o r T a b l e 3 Mean Number o f D i f f e r e n t R e s p o n s e s p e r C a t e g o r y . Sums o f Squares  df  Means Squares  Category Error  7.701 .155  6 14  Age Error  .003 7.853  2 18  Source  F-Ratio  P  1.283 .011  115.726  >.001  .002 .436  .004  .996  One-wav ANOVAs f o r T a b l e 6 C a t e g o r y T v o i c a l i t v R a t i n g s (Index o f C o m m o n a l i t y - I C ) Source  Sums o f Squares  df  Means Squares  F-Ratio  P  Category Error  .468 .086  6 14  .078 .006  12.755  >. 001  Age Error  .063 .491  2 18  .032 .027  1.156  .337  100 One-way ANOVAs f o r T a b l e 8 C a t e g o r y D i v e r s i t y R a t i n g s (Type/Token Source  Sums o f Squares  df  Means Squares  Ratios-TTR)  F-Ratio  P  Category Error  .434 .026  6 14  .072 .002  38.388  >.001  Age Error  .020 .440  2 18  .010 .024  .409  .671  One-way ANOVAs f o r T a b l e 10 T y p i c a l i t y / D i v e r s i t y R a t i o s fTDR) Source  Sums o f Squares  df  Means Squares  Category Error  19.396 4.760  6 14  3.233 .340  9.508  >.001  Age Error  2.641 21.514  2 18  1.321 1.195  1.105  .353  F-Ratio  P  101 APPENDIX C List  1:  Alphabetical  Ordered  C a t e g o r y P r o d u c t i o n Norms  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEM  f  %  FOUR YEARS f  %  FIVE YEARS f  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  CATEGORY: CLOTHES BARRETTE BATHSUIT BLOUSE BOOTS BRA COAT CUTOFFS DRESS DRESSHIRT DRESSPANT EARRINGS EXERCPANT HAT JACKET JAMMIES JEANS JOGPANTS JOGSHIRT JOGSHORT JUMPER LEGWARM LEOTARD LNGSLVDSHT MITTS NECKLACE PAJAMAS PANTIES PANTS RAINCOAT RINGS SCARVES SHIRT SHOES SHORTS SHRTSLVDSHT SKIRT SLIPPERS SNOWPANT SOCKS STOCKING  1 2 0 0 1 2 0 10 0 0 0 1 3 3 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 21 1 0 0 14 9 8 2 2 0 0 10 1  3,.33 6,.67 0..00 0..00 3..33 6,.67 0,.00 33..33 0.,00 0,.00 0.,00 3,.33 10..00 10,.00 6.,67 0,.00 3 ,33 . 3,.33 3..33 0,.00 0..00 0..00 3 .33 . 0..00 0.,00 0..00 3.,33 70..00 3 .33 . 0..00 0.,00 46,.67 30..00 26,.67 6.,67 6..67 0..00 0..00 33 .,33 3.,33  0 0 0 1 0 1 0 15 0 0 2 0 4 2 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 3 3 30 0 1 0 24 10 11 0 4 0 2 14 0  0.,00 0,.00 0..00 3,.23 0..00 3,. 23 0.,00 48,.39 0.,00 0,.00 6..45 0,.00 12..90 6,.45 0..00 9,.68 0.,00 0,.00 0.,00 3,.23 3.,23 3,.23 0.,00 0,.00 3.,23 9,.68 9.,68 96..77 0.,00 3..23 0.,00 77,.42 32., 26 35,.48 0.,00 12,.90 0.,00 6..45 45.,16 0..00  0 0 1 1 0 0 1 9 1 1 0 0 4 2 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 23 0 0 1 20 8 9 3 4 1 0 17 1  0,.00 0,.00 3 .57 . 3..57 0..00 0,.00 3..57 32,.14 3..57 3,.57 0..00 0,.00 14..29 7,.14 0..00 14,.29 0.,00 0,.00 0..00 0,.00 0..00 0,.00 0.,00 3,.57 0..00 0,.00 10.,71 82..14 0..00 0..00 3.,57 71..43 28.,57 32,.14 10.,71 14,.29 3 ,57 . 0..00 60.,71 3.,57  1 2 1 2 1 3 1 34 1 1 2 1 11 7 2 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 3 7 74 1 1 1 58 27 28 5 10 1 2 41 2  1..11 2,.22 1..11 2..22 1.,11 3,.33 1.,11 37,.78 1..11 1,.11 2.,22 1..11 12..22 7,.78 2., 22 7,.78 1.,11 1,.11 1.,11 1,.11 1..11 1,.11 1..11 1,.11 1..11 3.. 33 7.,78 82..22 1.,11 1..11 1.,11 64..44 30.,00 31..11 5.,56 11..11 1.,11 2., 22 45.,56 2..22  102  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEM SUIT SUSPENDER SWEATER SWIMSUIT SWTSHRT TIGHTS TOWEL TROUSERS TSHIRT TURTNECK UNDERPANTS UNDERSHRT UNDERWEAR UNDIES VESTS  FOUR YEARS  f  %  f  %  1 0 6 2 2 0 1 0 7 0 0 2 4 1 0  3.33 0.00 20.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 3.33 0.00 23.33 0.00 0.00 6.67 13.33 3.33 0.00  0 0 5 0 0 1 0 1 7 0 0 0 7 1 1  0.00 0.00 16.13 0.00 0.00 3.23 0.00 3.23 22.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 22.58 3.23 3.23  3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 10.00 0.00 3.33 0.00 6.67 13.33 3.33 0.00 3.33 0.00 3.33 13.33 16.67 3.33 13.33 3.33 3.33 0.00 3.33 0.00 0.00 6.67 33.33  0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 8 0 1 2 1 7 8 2 0 4 1 1 3 0 1 0 2 2  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.23 0.00 0.00 3.23 25.81 0.00 3.23 6.45 3.23 22.58 25.81 6.45 0.00 12.90 3.23 3.23 9.68 0.00 3.23 0.00 6.45 6.45  FIVE YEARS f 0 2 2 0 2 0 0 1 4 1 1 4 5 0 0  TOTAL SAMPLE  %  f  %  0.00 7.14 7.14 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 3.57 14.29 3.57 3.57 14.29 17.86 0.00 0.00  1 2 13 2 4 1 1 2 18 1 1 6 16 2 1  1.11 2.22 14.44 2.22 4.44 1.11 1.11 2.22 20.00 1.11 1.11 6.67 17.78 2. 22 1.11  0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 17.86 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 14.29 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 7.14 17.86 28.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 14.29  1 1 1 1 8 1 1 1 3 16 1 1 4 1 10 17 15 1 8 2 2 4 1 1 1 4 16  1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 8.99 1.12 1.12 1.12 3.37 17.98 1.12 1.12 4.49 1.12 11.24 19.10 16.85 1.12 8.99 2.25 2.25 4.49 1.12 1.12 1.12 4.49 17.98  CATEGORY: KITCHEN APPLEJUICE 1 APRON 1 BEATERS 0 BOOKS 0 BOWL 3 BOXES 0 BREAD 1 BR00MCL0SET 0 CANDIES 2 CHAIR 4 CHICKENSOUP 1 CONTAINERS 0 COOKIES 1 0 COOKGLOVES COUNTER 1 CUPBOARDS 4 CUPS 5 DADS 1 DISHES 4 DISHWASHER 1 DOORS 1 DRAWERS 0 DRINK 1 EGGS 0 ELECTCANOPEN 0 FLOOR 2 FOOD 10  0 0 1 1 5 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 1 0 2 5 8 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 4  103  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEM  f  F00DC0L0R 0 7 FORKS FREEZER 2 FRIDGE 9 FRUIT 0 FRUITROLLUP 1 GARBAGE 0 GLASS 0 JARS 0 JUICE 0 KETTLES 0 0 KNIFESHARP KNIVES 6 LIGHTS 0 0 MICROWAVES 4 MILK MOMMIES 1 MUG 0 NOODLES 1 OVENS 1 PANS 2 PAPER 1 PEOPLE 1 0 PLASTICKNIVE PLATES 7 POP 1 POTS 1 RADIO 0 RICEKRISPI 1 SANDWHICH 1 0 SHARPKNIVE 6 SINK SKELTCROSSB 0 0 SPAGHETTI SPATULA 0 SPONGES 0 SPOONS 6 1 STOOLS STOVES 12 SUGAR 0 TABLE 7 0 TAPS TEACUPS 0 TEAKETTLE 1 TOAST 0 TOASTER 1  % 0..00 23..33 6..67 30..00 0.,00 3..33 0.,00 0..00 0.,00 0..00 0.,00 0..00 20.,00 0..00 0.,00 13..33 3 .33 . 0..00 3..33 3.. 33 6..67 3.. 33 3 .33 . 0..00 23 . .33 3..33 3..33 0..00 3..33 3..33 0..00 20..00 0..00 0..00 0..00 0..00 20..00 3.. 33 40..00 0.. 00 23..33 0..00 0..00 3.,33 0..00 3., 33  FOUR YEARS f 0 7 1 12 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 5 0 0 1 0 0 0 4 8 0 0 1 3 0 9 0 0 0 1 10 0 1 0 1 7 0 15 0 13 0 1 1 1 0  % 0 .00 22 .58 3 .23 38 .71 3 .23 0 .00 3 .23 3 .23 0 .00 3 . 23 0 .00 0 .00 16 .13 0 .00 0 .00 3 .23 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 12 .90 25 .81 0 .00 0 .00 3 .23 9 .68 0 .00 29 .03 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 3 .23 32 .26 0 .00 3 . 23 0 .00 3 .23 22 .58 0 .00 48 .39 0 .00 41 .94 0 .00 3 .23 3 .23 3 .23 0 .00  F I V E YEARS f 1 12 0 4 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 9 3 2 0 0 1 0 3 4 0 0 0 8 0 6 1 0 0 0 5 1 0 1 0 12 0 8 1 8 1 0 0 0 1  TOTAL  %  f  3..57 42,.86 0..00 14,.29 0..00 0..00 0..00 3,.57 3 .57 . 0,.00 3..57 3..57 32.,14 10,.71 7.,14 0,.00 0.,00 3,.57 0.,00 10,.71 14.,29 0,.00 0.,00 0..00 28.,57 0,.00 21.,43 3..57 0.,00 0,.00 0..00 17,.86 3.,57 0,.00 3..57 0,.00 42.,86 0,.00 28.,57 3..57 28.,57 3..57 0.,00 0.,00 0.,00 3.,57  1 26 3 25 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 20 3 2 5 1 1 1 8 14 1 1 1 18 1 16 1 1 1 1 21 1 1 1 1 25 1 35 1 28 1 1 2 1 2  SAMPLE  1..12 29,.21 3..37 28,.09 1,.12 1,.12 1,.12 2,.25 1..12 1,.12 1..12 1,.12 22..47 3,.37 2.,25 5..62 1..12 1,.12 1..12 8..99 15.,73 1..12 1.,12 1..12 20.,22 1,.12 17.,98 1..12 1..12 1..12 1.,12 23..60 1.,12 1..12 1.,12 1.. 12 28.,09 1..12 39.,33 1..12 31.,46 1., 12 1.,12 2.,25 1.,12 2.,25  104  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEM TV WATER WATERMELON WINDOWS  f  %  1 1 0 0  FOUR YEARS f  %  F I V E YEARS f  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00  0 1 0 1  0.00 3.23 0.00 3.23  0 0 1 2  0.00 0.00 3.57 7.14  1 2 1 3  1.12 2.25 1.12 3.37  0.00 3.23 0.00 0.00 3.23 3.23 0.00  1 0 0 1 0 1 1 4 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1  3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 12.50 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 9.38 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 28.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13  0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 1  0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.29 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3 .57 3.57 0.00 3.57  1 1 1 1 2 2 2 4 1 1 2 1 7 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 25 1 1 1 1 1 1 4 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 2  1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20 2.20 2.20 4.40 1.10 1.10 2.20 1.10 7.69 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20 2.20 1.10 27.47 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 4.40 1.10 2.20 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 2.20  ^TEGORY: PLAYGROUND ANIMALS ANT BALL BALLOONS BARS BEACH BIKES BIRDS BLOCKS BLUESKY BOAT BOYS BRIDGES BUG BUNNIES BUTTERFLY CARS CATS CHILDREN CHURCH CLIMBER CLOUDS COCACOLA CONCRETE CUPS DIGGERS DINOSAUR DOGS DUCKS ELEPHANTS FISH FLOWERS FOOTBALL FRIEND GATE GEESE GIRLS GRASS  0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 5 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0  o.oo-  3.23 0.00 3.23 3.23 6.45 6.45 0.00 3.23 0.00 3.23 3.23 3.23 16.13 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.23 6.45 0.00 3.23 3.23 0.00 3 .23 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .23 0.00  105  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEM  f  HANGERS 0 HIGHTOPS 0 HILLS 0 TIREHOLES 0 HOPSCOTCH 1 HOUSES 2 1 JUNGLEGYM KIDS 1 LAPDER 2 LEAVES 1 LITTLEHOUSE 0 1 MERRYGOROUND MONKEYBARS 2 PEACOCKS 1 PEOPLE 4 0 PICNICTABLE PLANTS 0 PLAYHOUSE 2 PLAYSEABUS 0 POLE 4 POND 2 RAKES 0 RAMP 0 RING 0 RIVER 0 ROPES 0 ROUNDABOUT 0 RUNNING 0 SAND 2 1 SANDBOX SANDWHICHES 0 SCHOOL 0 SEE-SAW 1 SHOVEL 0 SKATEBOARDS 1 SLIDES 25 SNAILS 1 SNAKE 1 SOCCERTEAM 1 0 SPRINKLER STAIRS 2 1 STEERWHEEL SWIMPOOL 1 SWINGS 20 TABLE 0 TEETTOTTER 5  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  %  f  %  f  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.23 6.45 3.23 3.23 6.45 3.23 0.00 3.23 6.45 3.23 12.90 0. 00 0.00 6.45 0.00 12.90 6.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.45 3.23 0.00 0.00 3.23 0.00 3.23 80.65 3.23 3.23 3.23 0.00 6.45 3.23 3.23 64.52 0.00 16.13  1 0 1 1 0 2 2 1 3 1 1 5 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1. 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 0 0 27 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 29 1 9  3.13 0.00 3 .13 3.13 0.00 6.25 6.25 3.13 9.38 3.13 3.13 15.63 3.13 0.00 3 .13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 9.38 6.25 3.13 6.25 3.13 0.00 0.00 84. 38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9. 38 0.00 6.25 90.63 3.13 28.17  1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 2 4 0 1 0 1 1 1 9 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 0 1 3 0 0 0 1 0 24 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 22 0 4  %  3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.71 0.00 0.00 7.14 14.29 0.00 3 .57 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 32.14 7.14 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 7.14 7.14 0.00 3.57 10.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 85.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 78.57 0.00 14.29  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  2 1 2 1 1 4 3 2 8 2 1 8 7 1 6 1 1 4 1 14 4 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 6 6 1 2 2 1 1 76 1 1 1 1 6 1 3 71 1 18  2.20 1.10 2.20 1.10 1.10 4.40 3.30 2.20 8.79 2.20 1.10 8.79 7.69 1.10 6.59 1.10 1.10 4.40 1.10 15.38 4.40 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 3.30 3.30 1.10 6 .59 6.59 1.10 2.20 2.20 1.10 1.10 83. 52 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 6.59 1.10 3.30 78.02 1.10 19.80  106  SUBJECT THREE YEARS ITEM TIRES TIRESWING TOWER TOYS TREEHOUSE TREES TRICYCLES TUNNEL WATER WATERFOUNT WORM  AGE-GROUP  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL SAMPLE  f  %  f  %  f  %  f  1 4 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 1  3.23 12.90 3.23 3.23 6.45 0.00 0.00 3.23 3.23 0.00 3.23  3 3 0 1 1 3 0 1 1 1 0  9.38 9.38 0.00 3.13 3.13 9.38 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00  2 6 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0  7.14 21.43 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  6 13 1 2 3 4 1 2 2 1 1  6.59 14.29 1.10 2.20 3.30 4.40 1.10 2.20 2.20 1.10 1.10  0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 18 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 2  0.00 0.00 6.25 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 56.25 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 6.25 3.13 0.00 3.13 6.25  1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 1 0 2 1 0 1 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2  3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 7.41 3.70 0.00 7.41 3.70 0.00 3.70 48.15 7.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41  1 1 2 2 4 1 1 1 4 1 1 3 4 1 1 38 4 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 2 4 1 1 1 5  1.14 1.14 2.27 2.27 4.55 1.14 1.14 1.14 4.55 1.14 1.14 3.41 4.55 1.14 1.14 43.18 4.55 1.14 1.14 3.41 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 2.27 4.55 1.14 1.14 1.14 5.68  CATEGORY: RESTAURANT APPLEJUICE BAKERMEN BAKER BALLOON BATHROOM BOOKS BOOTH BOOTS BOWLS BOX BUNNIES CAKE CANDY CARPET CAT CHAIRS CHEF CHEESESOUP CHERRIES CHICKEN CHINESFOOD CLOWNS COFFEE COKE COOK COOKIES COUNTER CRACKERS CRAYONS CUPBOARDS CUPS  0 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 0 0 7 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 0 1  0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 6.90 3.45 0.00 3.45 3 .45 0.00 0.00 3.45 10.34 0.00 0.00 24.14 6.90 0.00 0.00 6.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 6.90 3.45 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45  107 i  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEM DECORATION DOOR DRIEDBANAN DRINKS FISH FISHNCHIPS FLOOR FLOWERS FOOD FORKS FORTUNCOOK FRIEND FRIES FRYINGPAN GARBAGCANS GLASS HAMBURGER HOTDOG ICECREAM JUICE KETCHUP KEYOPENREST KITCHEN KNIVES LADY LAMPS LEMONADE LIGHTS MAN MESSENGER MICROWAVE MILK MONEY MUFFINS NAPKIN NOODLES ONIONS ORANGES OVEN PAPER PARROTS PAYERS PEOPLE PEOPLESELL PICTURES PIZZA  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  f  %  f  %  f  0 3 0 1 3 0 1 0 13 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 0 5 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 0 4 1 1 1  0.00 10.34 0.00 3.45 10.34 0.00 3.45 0.00 44.83 3.45 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 10.34 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 0.00 17.24 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 3.45 0.00 3.45 3.45 3 .45 0.00 0.00 10.34 0.00 0.00 13.79 3.45 3.45 3.45  1 1 0 .2 2 1 0 2 17 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 11 0 0 0  3.13 3.13 0.00 6.25 6.25 3.13 0.00 6. 25 53.13 9.38 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 6.25 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 9.38 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0 .00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 34.38 0.00 0.00 0.00  0 2 1 3 0 0 0 1 12 6 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 13 0 0 1  % 0.00 7.41 3.70 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 44.44 22.22 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.70 11.11 0.00 3.70 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 . 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 48.15 0.00 0.00 3.70  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  1 6 1 6 5 1 1 3 42 10 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 2 1 1 6 7 1 2 1 3 2 1 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 28 1 1 2  1.14 6.82 1.14 6.82 5.68 1.14 1.14 3.41 47.73 11.36 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 2.27 5.68 1.14 2.27 2.27 1.14 1.14 6.82 7.95 1.14 2.27 1.14 3.41 2.27 1.14 1.14 3.41 1.14 1.14 2.27 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 3.41 1.14 1.14 31.82 1.14 1.14 2.27  108  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL SAMPLE  ITEM  f  %  f  %  f  %  f  %  PLANTS PLATES POP RADIOS RAWFOOD ROOF SALAD SANDWHICHES SCALLOPS SEAT SERVERS SHELVES SONGS SOUP SPAGHETTI SPOONS STAIRS STEAKS STOVE SUSHI TABLE TEAPOT TOYS TRAY WAITER WAITRESS WALLS WINDOWS WINEGLASS  0 5 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 9 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 0  0.00 17.24 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 3.45 3.45 31.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3. 45 6.90 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00  1 4 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 1 2 0 21 0 4 1 0 1 1 3 0  3.13 12.50 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .13 12.50 3.13 3.13 6.25 0.00 65.63 0.00 12.50 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 9.38 0.00  1 8 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 4 1 0 1 1 16 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 1  3.70 29.63 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.81 3.70 0.00 3.70 3.70 59.26 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 11.11 0.00 3.70 3.70  2 17 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 17 2 1 3 1 37 1 6 1 2 4 1 5 1  2.27 19.32 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 2.27 19.32 2.27 1.14 3.41 1.14 42.05 1.14 6.82 1.14 2.27 4.55 1.14 5.68 1.14  0.00 10.71 3.57 0.00 3.57 7.14 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 7.14  0 3 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 3 0 0 0  0.00 9.38 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 6.25 0.00 9.38 0.00 0.00 0.00  1 1 0 1 0 4 1 5 3 0 0 0 1  1 7 1 2 2 6 3 8 3 3 1 1 3  1.15 8.05 1.15 2.30 2.30 6.90 3.45 9.20 3.45 3.45 1.15 1.15 3.45  CATEGORY: TOYS ACROBATOY AIRPLANE ANIMALS ARMYTOY BABIES BALLS BALLOONS BARBIES BARRETTES BASEBALBAT BATHTOYS BATHTUBS BEAR  0 3 1 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 2  3 .70 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 14.81 3.70 18.52 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70  109  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  ITEM  f  %  f  %  f  %  BEDS BELLS BIKES BINOCULAR BLANKET B-MOBILE BLOCKS BOATS BOOKS BOUNCEBABE BOXES BMW BUBBLEGUM BUCKETS BUGS BULL BULLDOZER BUNNIKINBWL BUNNIKINPLT BUS CALFRAISIN CAMERA CANDY CARRIAGE CARS CAT CEMENTRUCK CHAIR CHARLIETAPE CHILDCASETE CHOCOLATE CLOCKS CLOTHES CLOWN COLORBOOK COMPUTER CORVETTE CUDDLYTOY CRADLE CRANES CRAYONS CUDDLIES CUPBOARD DIGSWITCH DINOSAUR DINOSMUG  0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 5 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 2 0  0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 7.14 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 17.86 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 10.71 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3 .57 3.57 7.14 0.00  0 0 1 0 3 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 10 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0  0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 9.38 0.00 0.00 3.13 6.25 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 6.25 0.00 31.25 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 6.25 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00  1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 2 0 0 7 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 1 1  3.70 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 18.52 0.00 3.70 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3 .70 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 25.93 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 14.81 3.70 0.00 3.70 3.70  TOTAL SAMPLE f 1 2 1 1 4 1 1 2 9 1 .. 1 1 3 5 1 1 2 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 20 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 1 5 2 2 3 1  % 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 4.60 1.15 1.15 2.30 10.34 1.15 1.15 1.15 3 .45 5.75 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 2.30 3.45 1.15 22.99 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 2.30 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 5.75 2. 30 2.30 3.45 1.15  110  SUBJECT THREE YEARS  AGE-GROUP  FOUR YEARS  ITEM  f  %  f  DINOSPOST DISHES DOCTORKIT DOGS DOLLS DUCKTAIL DUMPTRUCK EARRINGS ELEPHANT FIREENGINE FIREENGGUY FIREHOUSE FLASHLIGHT FLOWERS FOX GAMES GARFIELD GHOSTBUSTCR GHOSTBUST GHOSTS GIJOE GLASSDOLL GOFISHCARD GUM GUNS GYM HANDCUFF HAUNTHOUS HOSE HORSE HOUSE INSTRUMENT JACKINBOX JET JUGGLTHING KEYBOARD KITCHEN KITTIES LEGO LIFEJACKET LION MAGICBOOK MAKUP MASKS MERCEDIZ MISMAKEUP  1 0 1 0 4 0 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0  3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 14.29 0.00 7.14 0.00 3 .57 3.57 3 .57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00  0 1 0 2 7 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 1 1 2 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0  % 0.00 3.13 0.00 6.25 21.88 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 6.25 3.13 3.13 3.13 6.25 . 3.13 0.00 6.25 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3 .13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00  F I V E YEARS f  %  0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1  0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 14.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 3 .70 0.00 11.11 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70  TOTAL SAMPLE f  1 1 1 3 15 1 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 5 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1  %  1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 17.24 1.15 3.45 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 5.75 1.15 2.30 2.30 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 4.60 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 2. 30 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15  Ill  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS  FOUR YEARS  ITEM  f  %  f  MONSTERS MOTORCYCLE MOUSES NINJATURT NINTENDO PENCILS PEOPLELIT PETANIMAL PHONE PICKERUP PICTURE PITCHER PIGGIES PLAYHOUSE PLAYMOBILE PLAYTREE POLARBEAR POLES POLICECAR PONIES POTATOHEAD POWERHWEELJ PULLTOY PUPPETS PUZZLES RABBIT RACINGCAR REMOTECONTR RHINO RINGS ROBOTS ROCKHORSE RUBBERDUCK SANDTRUCK SCOOTER SEWINGMACH SHOVEL SINK SKATEBOARD SLIDES SNUGABOOS SPIDERS SPORTSCAR SQUIRTGUN STAMP STEAMSHOVE  1 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0  3.57 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 10.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 10.71 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 3 .57 0. 00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 3 .57 0.00 7.14 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 10.71 0.00 0.00 3.57 0 .00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00  0 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 3 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 .0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 0 1  % 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 9. 38 0.00 9.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 6.25 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 9.38 0.00 6.25 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.25 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13  F I V E YEARS f 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0  % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 7.41 0.00 7.41 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3 .70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .70 3.70 0.00 3.70 7.41 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00  TOTAL SAMPLE f 1 2 1 2 2 2 6 2 4 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 4 1 1 1 2 4 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1  % 1.15 2.30 1.15 2.30 2.30 2.30 6.90 2.30 4.60 1.15 3.45 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 2.30 4.60 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 4.60 1.15 3.45 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 1.15 2.30 4.60 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15  112  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL SAMPLE  ITEM  f  %  f  %  f  %  f  %  STICKER STICKONEARR STORE STORYTAPE STOVE STROLLER STUFFEDANM SWIMPOOL . SWINGS SWORDS TABLES TAPERECORD TBALLSTUFF TEDDYBEAR TENT TIGER TINYFURNIT TOPS TOTEMPOLE TOWTRUCK TOYBOX TOYFARM TOYHAIR TOYHOUSE TRACTOR TRAINS TRANSFORMER TREES TRUCKS UNICORN VANS VOLLEYBALL WAGON WATERGUNS WHALES WHISTLES YOYO  0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 5 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 3.57 0.00 17.86 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00  0 0 1 0 2 0 1 3 1 1 1 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 2 1 7 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0  0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 6.25 0.00 3.13 9. 38 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 15.63 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 9.38 6.25 3.13 21.88 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00  1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 2 0 0 4 1 0 0 0 2 0 1 1  3.70 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 3 .70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 7.41 7.41 7.41 0.00 0.00 14.81 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 3.70 3.70  1 1 1 1 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 3 7 3 1 16 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 1  1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 1.15 2.30 3.45 1.15 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 8.05 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 2.30 3.45 8.05 3.45 1.15 18.39 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 1.15 2.30 1.15  0.00 25.81 6.45 16.13 9.68  1 3 6 14 1  0 8 7 14 1  0.00 28.57 25.00 50.00 3.57  1 19 15 33 5  1.11 21.11 16.67 36.67 5.56  CATEGORY: TRAVEL AMBULANCE BIKE BOAT BUS CAMEL  0 8 2 5 3  3.23 9.68 19.35 45.16 3.23  113  SUBJECT THREE YEARS ITEMS CAMPVAN CAR CARRIAGE DOG DUMPTRUCK ELEPHANT FERRY GARBAGTRUCK HELICOPTOR HOMEBOAT HORSE HOTAIRBALL JEEP JET MOTORCYCLE MOTORHOME MOVINGVAN PLANE POLICECAR PONY RACECAR ROCKET SAILBOAT SCHOOLBUS SCOOTER SEABUS SHIP SKATEBOARD SKYTRAIN SLEIGH SPACESHIP TAXI TRACTOR TRAILER TRAIN TRUCK VAN WAGON CATEGORY: ALLIGATOR BALOOGA BATS BEARS  AGE-GROUP  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS %  TOTAL SAMPLE  f  %  f  %  f  f  %  0 27 0 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 7 0 0 1 3 0 0 9 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 4 0 0 3 10 6 1  0 00 87 .10 0 00 3 23 3 23 3 23 0 00 3 .23 9 68 3 .23 22 58 0 .00 0 00 3 23 9 68 0 .00 0 00 29 .03 3 23 0 .00 0 00 3 .23 0 00 3 23 3 23 3 .23 0 00 0 .00 3 23 3 .23 3 23 12 .90 0 .00 0 .00 9 68 32 . 26 19 35 3 . 23  1 30 2 0 0 0 3 0 6 0 9 1 2 3 4 1 0 20 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 4 1 1 6 14 9 0  3 23 96 77 6. 45 0 00 0. 00 0 00 9 68 0 00 19. 35 0 00 29. 03 3 23 6 45 9 68 12. 90 3 23 0. 00 64 52 6 45 3 .23 3 23 0 .00 3 23 0 00 0. 00 3 .23 3 23 0 00 0 00 0 .00 3 23 12 .90 3 23 3 23 19. 35 45 .16 29. 03 0 00  0 25 0 0 0 0 5 0 2 0 6 0 2 2 1 0 1 14 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 0 0 4 0 1 8 12 6 1  0 00 89 .29 0 00 0 00 0. 00 0 00 17 86 0 .00 7 14 0 .00 21 43 0 .00 7 14 7 .14 3 57 0 .00 3 57 50 .00 0 00 0 .00 3 57 0 .00 0 00 0 .00 0 00 3 .57 0 00 3 .57 7 14 0 .00 0 00 14 .29 0 00 3 57 28 57 42 .86 21 43 3 .57  1 82 2 1 1 1 8 1 11 1 22 1 4 6 8 1 1 43 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 ' 1 1 3 1 2 12 1 2 17 36 21 2  1 .11 91 .11 2 .22 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 8 .89 1 .11 12 .22 1 .11 24 .44 1 .11 4 .44 6 .67 8 .89 1 .11 1 .11 47 .78 3 .33 1 .11 2 .22 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 3 .33 1 .11 1 .11 3 .33 1 .11 2 .22 13 .33 1 .11 2 .22 18 .89 40 .00 23 .33 2 .22  0 00 3 .13 3 13 31 .25  4 0 0 5  12 50 0 .00 0. 00 15 63  0 0 1 7  0 00 0 .00 3. 57 25 .00  4 1 2 22  4 .35 1 .09 2 .17 23 .91  ZOO 0 1 1 10  114  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  BEES BIGCATS BIRDS BOACONSTR BUNNY BUTTERFLY CAMEL CATS CHEETAH CHICKEN CHICKS COW CROCODILE DINOSAUR DOGS DOLPHIN DONKEY DRAGON DUCKS ELEPHANT FISH FLAMINGO FOX FROG GIRAFFFE GORRILLA GUINEAPIG HENS HIPPO HORSE INSECTS JAGUAR KANGAROO KITTY LAMBS LAUGHYEEN LEOPARD LIONS MICE MONKEY MOO MOOSE OSTRICH OTTERS OWL PARROTS  f  1  1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 12 3 1 1 1 12 1 0 0 3 5 0 0 4 0 1 1 0 17 0 11 1 0 0 0 0 0  3 .13 0 . 00 0 .00 0 .00 3 .13 3 .13 6 .25 0 .00 3 .13 3 .13 0 .00 6 .25 0 .00 3 .13 0 .00 3 .13 3 .13 3 .13 0 .00 37 .50 9 . 38 3 . 13 3 .13 3 .13 37 .50 3 .13 0 .00 0 .00 9 . 38 15 .63 0 .00 0 .00 12 .50 0 .00 3 .13 3 .13 0 .00 53 .13 0 .00 34 .38 3 .13 0 . 00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00  FOUR YEARS f 0 1 8 0 1 0 4 2 0 0 1 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 15 1 0 1 0 18 3 0 1 5 3 1 1 2 1 0 0 1 16 2 11 0 1 2 0 0 1  •  0. 00 3 13 25. 00 0 00 3. 13 0 .00 12 50 6 .25 0. 00 0 00 3. 13 3 13 9 38 0 .00 3 13 0 .00 0 00 0 .00 3 13 46 .88 3 13 0 .00 3 13 0 .00 56 25 9 . 38 0 00 3 .13 15 63 9 .38 3 13 3 .13 6 25 3 .13 0 00 0 .00 3 13 50 .00 6 25 34 .38 0 00 3 . 13 6 25 0 .00 0 00 3 .13  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL SAMPLE  f  1  f  %  0 0 4 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 2 0 2 0 2 0 4 14 1 0 0 0 12 1 1 0 3 2 0 0 5 0 2 0 0 10 1 15 0 0 0 1 1 0  0 .00 0 .00 14 .29 3 .57 3 .57 0 .00 3 .57 3 .57 0 .00 0 .00 3 .57 7 . 14 7 .14 0 .00 7 .14 0 .00 7 .14 0 .00 14 .29 50 .00 3 .57 0 .00 0 .00 0 . 00 42 .86 3 .57 3 .57 0 .00 10 .71 7 .14 0 .00 0 .00 17 .86 0 .00 7 .14 0 .00 0 .00 35 .71 3 .57 53 .57 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 3 .57 3 .57 0 .00  1 1 12 1 3 1 7 3 1 1 2 5 5 1 3 1 3 1 5 41 5 1 2 1 42 5 1 1 11 10 1 1 11 1 3 1 1 43 3 37 1 1 2 1 1 1  1 09 1 .09 13 04 1 .09 3 26 1 .09 7 61 3 .26 1 09 1 .09 2 17 5 .43 5 43 1 .09 3 26 1 .09 3 26 1 .09 5 43 44 .57 5 43 1 .09 2 17 1 .09 45 65 5 .43 1 09 1 .09 11 96 10 .87 1 09 1 .09 11 96 1 .09 3 26 1 .09 1 09 46 .74 3 26 40 22 1 09 1 .09 2 17 1 .09 1 09 1 .09  115  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS PEACOCK PENGUIN PIGS POLARBEAR PONIES PORCUPINE PUSSYCAT RABBIT RACOON ROOSTER SEALS SHEEP SLOTH SNAKES SPIDER SUQIRREL TIGER TURTLES WHALES WILDPIGS WOLVES ZEBRA  f  %  0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 1 15 0 4 0 0 2  0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 6.25 0.00 3.13 , 3.13 3.13 0.00 6.25 0.00 3.13 46.88 0.00 12.50 0.00 0.00 6.25  FOUR YEARS f 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 3 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 16 0 2 0 1 5  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL  SAMPLE  %  f  %  f  %  0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 9.38 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 6.25 3.13 3.13 50.00 0.00 6. 25 0.00 3 .13 15.63  2 2 1 4 1 0 0 1 1 0 2 2 1 2 0 2 8 3 4 1 1 3  7.14 7.14 3.57 14.29 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3 .57 0.00 7.14 7.14 3.57 7.14 0.00 7.14 28.57 10.71 14.29 3.57 3.57 10.71  2 3 2 5 2 1 1 6 1 2 4 3 1 6 1 4 39 3 10 1 2 10  2.17 3.26 2.17 5.43 2.17 1.09 1.09 6.52 1.09 2.17 4.35 3.26 1.09 6. 52 1.09 4.35 42.39 3.26 10.87 1.09 2.17 10.87  116  List  2:  Numerically  Ordered  Category  Production  Norms  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  %  FOUR YEARS f  %  F I V E YEARS f  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  CATEGORY: CLOTHES PANTS SHIRT SOCKS DRESS SHORTS SHOES TSHIRT . UNDERWEAR SWEATER HAT SKIRT JACKET JEANS PANTIES UNDERSHRT SHRTSLVDSHT SWTSHRT COAT PAJAMAS BATHSUIT BOOTS EARRINGS JAMMIES SNOWPANT STOCKING SUSPENDER SWIMSUIT TROUSERS UNDIES BARRETTE BLOUSE BRA CUTOFFS DRESSHIRT DRESSPANT EXERCPANT JOGPANTS JOGSHIRT JOGSHORT JUMPER  21 14 10 10 8 9 7 4 6 3 2 3 0 1 2 2 2 2 0 2 0 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0  I 70. ,00 46. .67 33. ,33 33..33 26. ,67 30..00 23 .,33 13 ..33 20. ,00 10..00 6.,67 10..00 0.,00 3..33 6.,67 6..67 6.,67 6..67 0.,00 6..67 0.,00 0..00 6.,67 0..00 3 .33 . 0..00 6.,67 0..00 3,.33 3,. 33 0,.00 3,.33 0..00 0,.00 0..00 3,.33 3 .33 . 3..33 3..33 0,.00  30 24 14 15 11 10 7 7 5 4 4 2 3 3 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 2 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , 1  96. ,77 77..42 45. ,16 48..39 35.,48 32..26 22. ,58 22..58 16. ,13 12.,90 12. ,90 6..45 9.,68 9..68 0.,00 0..00 0.,00 3..23 9..68 0..00 3..23 6..45 0.,00 6..45 . 0. .00 0..00 0..00 3.. 23 3..23 0,.00 0,.00 0..00 0.,00 0,.00 0..00 0,.00 0..00 0,.00 0..00 3,.23  23 20 17 9 . 9 8 4 5 2 4 4 2 4 3 4 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0  82. ,14 71,.43 60. .71 32..14 32. .14 28, .57 14. ,29 17..86 7..14 14. . 29 14. .29 7..14 14. .29 10, .71 14. .29 10,.71 7..14 0..00 0..00 0..00 3..57 0..00 0.,00 0..00 3..57 7,. 14 0..00 3,.57 0..00 0,.00 3..57 0..00 3..57 3,.57 3 .57 . 0,.00 0..00 0,.00 0,.00 0,.00  74 58 41 34 28 27 18 16 13 11 10 7 7 7 6 5 4 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  82. ,22 64..44 45.,56 37,.78 31..11 30..00 20.,00 17..78 14. ,44 12..22 11.,11 7,.78 7.,78 7..78 6.,67 5..56 4.,44 3..33 3.,33 2..22 2.,22 2..22 2.,22 2..22 2..22 2.. 22 2..22 2,.22 2..22 1,.11 1..11 1,.11 1..11 1,.11 1..11 1,.11 1..11 1,.11 1,.11 1,.11  i  117  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS LEGWARM LEOTARD LNGSLVDSHT MITTS NECKLACE RAINCOAT RINGS SCARVES SLIPPERS SUIT TIGHTS TOWEL TURTNECK UNDERPANTS VESTS  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  f  %  f  %  f  0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0  0.00 0.00 3.33 0.00 0.00 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.33 0.00 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00  1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1  3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 3.23 0.00 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.23  0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0  40.00 23.33 23.33 30.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 23.33 13.33 13.33 33.33 3.33 16.67 6.67 3.33 13.33 3.33 10.00 13.33 6.67 0.00 3.33 0.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 3.33  15 13 7 12 7 10 5 3 8 8 2 9 2 8 7 4 4 0 1 2 3 2 0 1 1 1 1  8 8 12 4 12 5 9 8 5 4 4 6 8 4 2 0 3 5 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 2 0  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .57 3.57 0.00  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11 1.11  28.57 28.57 42.86 14.29 42.86 17.86 32.14 28. 57 17.86 14.29 14.29 21.43 28.57 14.29 7.14 0.00 10.71 17.86 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 10.71 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00  35 28 26 25 25 21 20 18 17 16 16 16 15 14 10 8 8 8 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 2  39.33 31.46 29.21 28.09 28.09 23.60 22.47 20. 22 19.10 17.98 17.98 17.98 16.85 15.73 11.24 8.99 8.99 8.99 5.62 4.49 4.49 4.49 3.37 3.37 3.37 3.37 2.25  CATEGORY: KITCHEN STOVES 12 TABLE 7 FORKS 7 9 FRIDGE SPOONS 6 SINK 6 KNIVES 6 PLATES 7 CUPBOARDS 4 CHAIR 4 FOOD 10 POTS 1 CUPS 5 PANS 2 COUNTER 1 DISHES 4 OVENS 1 BOWL 3 MILK 4 FLOOR 2 DRAWERS 0 COOKIES 1 LIGHTS 0 CANDIES 2 FREEZER 2 WINDOWS 0 TEAKETTLE 1  48.39 41.94 22.58 38.71 22.58 32.26 16.13 9.68 25.81 25.81 6.45 29.03 6.45 25.81 22.58 12.90 12.90 0.00 3.23 6.45 9.68 6.45 0.00 3 . 23 3.23 3.23 3 .23  118  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS  FOUR YEARS  ITEMS  f  %  f  WATER DISHWASHER DOORS TOASTER GLASS MICROWAVES FRUITROLLUP MOMMIES NOODLES PAPER PEOPLE POP RICEKRISPI SANDWHICH STOOLS TV APPLEJUICE APRON BOXES BREAD CHICKENSOUP CONTAINERS COOKGLOVES DADS DRINK EGGS FRUIT GARBAGE JUICE PLASTICKNIVE SHARPKNIVE SPAGHETTI SPONGES TEACUPS . TOAST BEATERS BOOKS BROOMCLOSET ELECTCANOPEN FOODCOLOR JARS KETTLES KNIFESHARP MUG RADIO SKELTCROSSB  1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 0.00 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  % 3.23 3.23 3.23 0.00 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 3.23 0.00 0.00 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 3.23 3.23 3. 23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  F I V E YEARS f 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  % 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3 .57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3 .57 3. 57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 2.25 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12  119  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS SPATULA SUGAR TAPS WATERMELON  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL  SAMPLE %  f  %  f  %  f  %  f  0 0 0 0  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  0 0 0 0  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  1 1 1 1  3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57  1 1 1 1  27 29 9 9 1 3 3 5 3 1 3 3 3 2 1 4 3 2 1 1 0 2 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  84.38 90.63 28.13 28.17 3.13 9.38 9.38 15.63 9.38 3.13 9.38 9.38 9.38 6.25 3.13 12.50 9.38 6.25 3.13 3.13 0.00 6.25 6.25 3.13 3 .13 3.13 6.25 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13  24 22 11 4 9 6 3 2 2 4 2 1 1 3 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  85.71 78.57 39.29 14.29 32.14 21.43 10.71 7.14 7.14 14.29 7.14 3.57 3.57 10.71 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3.57 7.14 0.00 0.00 7.14 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  76 71 25 18 14 13 8 8 7 7 6 6 6 6 6 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2  1.12 1.12 1.12 1.12  CATEGORY: PLAYGROUND SLIDES 25 SWINGS 20 CLIMBER 5 TEETTOTTER 5 POLE 4 TIRESWING 4 LADDER 2 MERRYGOROUND 1 2 BRIDGES MONKEYBARS 2 TIRES 1 SAND 2 STAIRS 2 SANDBOX 1 PEOPLE 4 BIRDS 0 0 TREES HOUSES 2 DOGS 2 PLAYHOUSE 2 POND 2 1 JUNGLEGYM SWIMPOOL 1 ROPES 0 ROUNDABOUT 0 TREEHOUSE 2 SCHOOL 0 BEACH 1 BOAT 1 CATS 1 CHILDREN 1 ELEPHANTS 1 KIDS 1 LEAVES 1 SEE-SAW 1 TOYS 1 TUNNEL 1 WATER 1  80.65 64.52 16.13 16.13 12.90 12.90 6.45 3.23 6.45 6.45 3.23 6.45 6.45 3.23 12.90 0.00 0.00 6.45 6.45 6.45 6.45 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 6. 45 0.00 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3 . 23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3 . 23  83.52 78.02 27.47 19.80 15. 38 14.29 8.79 8.79 7.69 7.69 6.59 6.59 6.59 6.59 6.59 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 4.40 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2. 20 2. 20 2.20 2. 20 2.20 2 .20 2.20  120  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS BIKES FLOWERS GRASS HANGERS HILLS BUG BARS ANIMALS BALLOONS BLUESKY BUNNIES CARS TIREHOLES LITTLEHOUSE PICNICTABLE RUNNING SANDWHICHES TABLE WATERFOUNT ANT BLOCKS BOYS BUTTERFLY CHURCH CLOUDS COCACOLA DINOSAUR FISH FOOTBALL GIRLS HOPSCOTCH PEACOCKS SKATEBOARDS SNAILS SNAKE SOCCERTEAM STEERWHEEL TOWER WORM BALL CONCRETE CUPS DIGGERS DUCKS FRIEND GATE  f 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.45 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3 . 23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 3.23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00  FOUR YEARS f 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  %  3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3 .13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL SAMPLE  f  %  f  1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57  2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  %  2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 2.20 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10  121  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS GEESE HIGHTOPS PLANTS PLAYSEABUS RAKES RAMP RING RIVER SHOVEL SPRINKLER TRICYCLES  f  %  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  f  %  0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  44 .83 24.14 0.00 13.79 17.24 31.03 3 .45 3.45 10.34 3.45 17.24 6.90 3 .45 10.34 10. 34 3.45 6.90 3.45 10.34 6.90 3.45 0.00 3.45 6.90 0.00 3.45 3.45 10.34 0.00 0.00  17 18 21 11 4 4 3 3 1 2 0 4 2 2 2 3 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 1 2 1 0 0 2 2  53.13 56.25 65.63 34.38 12.50 12. 50 9.38 9. 38 3.13 6. 25 0.00 12.50 6.25 6.25 6. 25 9. 38 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 6.25 3.13 0.00 3.13 6.25 3.13 0.00 0.00 6.25 6.25  12 13 16 13 8 4 6 3 2 3 1 0 2. 0 0 1 1 2 1 2 1 3 2 0 1 1 2 0 1 0  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0  •  f  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  3 .57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 3 .57  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10 1.10  44.44 48.15 59.26 48.15 29.63 14.81 22.22 11.11 7.41 11.11 3.70 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 7.41 3.70 7.41 3.70 11.11 7.41 0.00 3.70 3.70 7.41 0.00 3 .70 0.00  42 38 37 28 17 17 10 7 6 6 6 6 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2  47.73 43.18 42.05 31.82 19.32 19.32 11.36 7.95 6.82 6.82 6.82 6.82 5.68 5.68 5.68 5.68 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 3.41 2.27  V.TEGORY: RESTAURANT FOOD CHAIRS TABLE PEOPLE PLATES SPOONS FORKS KNIVES DOOR DRINKS KITCHEN TOYS CUPS FISH HAMBURGER WINDOWS BATHROOM BOWLS CANDY CHEF COUNTER WAITRESS CAKE CHICKEN FLOWERS LIGHTS MILK PAPER STOVE BAKER  13 7 0 4 5 9 1 1 3 1 5 2 1 3 3 1 2 1 3 2 1 0 1 2 0 1 1 3 0 0  122  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  BALLOON COOKIES GLASS ICECREAM JUICE LAMPS MAN NAPKIN PIZZA PLANTS SPAGHETTI STAIRS WAITER APPLJUICE BAKERMEN BOOKS BOOTH BOOTS BOX BUNNIES CARPET CAT CHEESESOUP CHERRIES CHINESFOOD CLOWNS COFFEE COKE COOK CRACKERS CRAYONS CUPBOARDS DECORATION DRIEDBANAN FISHNCHIPS FLOOR FORTUNCOOK FRIEND FRIES FRYINGPAN GARBAGCANS HOTDOG KETCHUP KEYOPENREST LADY  1 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0  % 3 .45 6.90 3.45 3.45 0.00 0. 00 0.00 3.45 3 .45 0. 00 3.45 0. 00 3.45 0.00 0.00 3 . 45 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 . 45 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00  FOUR YEARS f 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1  % 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3 .13 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13  F I V E YEARS f 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0  %  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 3 .70 0.00 3 .70 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00  TOTAL SAMPLE f  2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  %  2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2. 27 2.27 2.27 2. 27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 2.27 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14  123  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS [TEMS  LEMONADE MESSENGER MICROWAVE MONEY MUFFINS NOODLES ONIONS ORANGES OVEN PARROTS PAYERS PEOPLESELL PICTURES POP RADIOS RAWFOOD ROOF SALAD SANDWICHES SCALLOPS SEAT SERVERS SHELVES SONGS SOUP STEAKS SUSHI TEAPOT TRAY WALLS WINEGLASS  f  %  FOUR YEARS f  %  F I V E YEARS f  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0  0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 0.00 3.45 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 3.45 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 3 .45 0.00 0.00 3 .45 0.00 3.45 3.45 0.00 0.00 3.45 0 .00 0.00 0.00  1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0  3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3 .70 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14 1.14  3 5 4 2 1 3 1 2 2 3  10.71 17. 86 14.29 7.14 3.57 10.71 3 .57 7.14 7.14 10.71  10 7 7 2 2 3 5 3 0 3  31.25 21.88 21.88 6.25 6.25 9.38 15.63 9.38 0.00 9.38  7 4 4 5 5 1 1 2 4 0  25.93 14.81 14.81 18.52 18.52 3.70 3.70 7.41 14.81 0.00  20 16 15 9 8 7 7 7 6 6  22.99 18. 39 17. 24 10.34 9.20 8.05 8.05 8.05 6.90 6.90  CATEGORY: TOYS CARS TRUCKS DOLLS BOOKS BARBIES AIRPLANE TEDDYBEAR TRAINS BALLS PEOPLELIT  124  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS  FOUR YEARS  ITEMS  f  %  f  BUCKETS CUDDLIES GHOSTBUST BLANKET HORSE PHONE PONIES PUZZLES SLIDES BALLOONS BARRETTES BASEBALBAT BEAR BUBBLEGUM CANDY DINOSAUR DOGS DUMPTRUCK PICTURE RACINGCAR ROBOTS SHOVEL SWIMPOOL TRACTOR TRANSFORMER WATERGUNS ARMYTOY BABIES BELLS BOATS BULLDOZER BUS CAMERA CEMENTRUCK CLOWN COMPUTER CUDDLYTOY CUPBOARD DIGSWITCH FIREENGINE GHOSTBUSTCR GIJOE GLASSDOLL GUNS KITCHEN  5 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 0 1 2 0 2 3 1 2 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1  17.86 3.57 3.57 0.00 7.14 0. 00 0.00 0.00 3 .57 3.57 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 3.57 7.14 0.00 7.14 10.71 3.57 7.14 10.71 0.00 0.00 3 .57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 7.14 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57  0 0 1 3 1 3 2 3 2 1 0 3 0 1 2 0 2 1 0 2 0 0 3 1 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 1 1 2 1 2 2 1  % 0.00 0.00 3.13 9.38 3.13 9.38 6.25 9.38 6.25 3.13 0.00 9.38 0.00 3.13 6.25 0.00 6.25 3.13 0.00 6. 25 0.00 0.00 9.38 3.13 6.25 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 6.25 0.00 3.13 3.13 6.25 3.13 6.25 6.25 3.13  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL SAMPLE  f  %  f  0 4 3 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 3 0 1 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 2 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0  0.00 14.81 11.11 3.70 3.70 3.70 7.41 3.70 3.70 3.70 11.11 0.00 3 .70 7.41 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 7.41 3.70 0.00 7.41 0.00 3.70 0.00 7.41 0.00 7.41 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00  5 5 5 4 4 4 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2  % 5.75 5.75 5.75 4.60 4.60 4.60 4.60 4.60 4.60 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3 .45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2. 30 2. 30 2. 30 2.30 2. 30 2.30 2.30 2. 30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30  125  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  LION MOTORCYCLE NINJATURT NINTENDO PENCILS PETANIMAL POLES POLICECAR PUPPETS SKATEBOARD STOVE STUFFEDANM SWORDS TOYHOUSE WHISTLES ACROBATOY ANIMALS BATHTOYS BATHTUBS BEDS BIKES BINOCULAR B-MOBILE BLOCKS BOUNCEBABE BOXES BMW BUGS BULL BUNNIKINBWL BUNNIKINPLT CALFRAISIN CARRIAGE CAT CHAIR CHARLIETAPE CHILDCASETE CHOCOLATE CLOCKS CLOTHES COLORBOOK CORVETTE CRADLE CRANES CRAYONS  2 1 1 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0  % 7.14 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0. 00 3.57 0.00 0.00  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL  SAMPLE %  f  %  f  %  f  0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 0  0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 6.25 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00  0 0 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1  0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 7.41 7.41 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.41 0.00 3.70 3.70 7.41 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70  2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2. 30 2.30 2. 30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15  126  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  DINOSMUG DINOSPOST DISHES DOCTORKIT DUCKTAIL EARRINGS ELEPHANT FIREENGGUY FIREHOUSE FLASHLIGHT FLOWERS FOX GAMES GARFIELD GHOSTS GOFISHCARD GUM GYM HANDCUFF HAUNTHOUS HOSE HOUSE INSTRUMENT JACKINBOX JET JUGGLTHING KEYBOARD KITTIES LEGO LIFEJACKET MAGICBOOK MAKUP MASKS MERCEDIZ MISMAKEUP MONSTERS MOUSES PICKERUP PITCHER PIGGIES PLAYHOUSE PLAYMOBILE PLAYTREE POLARBEAR POTATOHEAD POWERHWE E L J  0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0  % 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0 .00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 . 57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00  FOUR YEARS f 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1  % 0.00 0. 00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13  F I V E YEARS f 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0  % 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00  TOTAL SAMPLE f 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  % 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15  127  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  PULLTOY RABBIT REMOTECONTR RHINO RINGS ROCKHORSE RUBBERDUCK SANDTRUCK SCOOTER SEWINGMACH SINK SNUGABOOS SPIDERS SPORTSCAR SQUIRTGUN STAMP STEAMSHOVE STICKER STICKONEARR STORE STORYTAPE STROLLER SWINGS TABLES TAPERECORD TBALLSTUFF TENT TIGER TINYFURNIT TOPS TOTEMPOLE TOWTRUCK TOYBOX TOYFARM TOYHAIR TREES UNICORN VANS VOLLEYBALL WAGON WHALES YO-YO  0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0  % 0.00 3.57 3.57 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3. 57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 3.57 3 .57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .57 3.57 0.00 0.00  FOUR YEARS f 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0  % 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3 .13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0. 00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00  F I V E YEARS f 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1  % 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0.00 3.70 3.70 0.00 3 .70 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .70 3.70 3 .70 0.00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 0. 00 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15 1.15  128  SUBJECT THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  %  AGE-GROUP  FOUR YEARS f  %  F I V E YEARS f  %  TOTAL SAMPLE f  %  CATEGORY: TRAVEL CAR PLANE TRUCK BUS HORSE VAN BIKE TRAIN BOAT TAXI HELICOPTOR FERRY MOTORCYCLE JET CAMEL JEEP POLICECAR SEABUS SKYTRAIN CARRIAGE RACECAR SPACESHIP TRAILER WAGON AMBULANCE CAMPVAN DOG DUMPTRUCK ELEPHANT GARBAGTRUCK HOMEBOAT HOTAIRBALL MOTORHOME MOVINGVAN PONY ROCKET SAILBOAT SCHOOLBUS SCOOTER SHIP SKATEBOARD SLEIGH TRACTOR  27 9 10 5 7 6 8 3 2 4 3 0 3 1 3 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 . 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 0  87 .10 29 .03 32 .26 16 .13 22 58 19 . 35 25 81 9 .68 6 45 12 .90 9 68 0 .00 9 68 3 . 23 9 68 0 .00 3 23 3 .23 3 23 0 00 0 00 3 .23 0 00 3 . 23 0 00 0 .00 3 23 3 .23 3 23 3 .23 3 23 0 .00 0 00 0 00 0 00 3 23 0. 00 3 23 3 .23 0 00 0. 00 3 23 0. 00  30 20 14 14 9 9 3 6 6 4 6 3 4 3 1 2 2 1 0 2 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1  96 77 64 .52 45 16 45 .16 29 03 29 .03 9 68 19 .35 19. 35 12 90 19 35 9 68 12 90 9 68 3 23 6 .45 6 45 3 23 0 00 6 45 3 23 3 23 3 23 0 00 3. 23 3 23 0 00 0 00 0 00 0 00 0. 00 3 23 3 .23 0 00 3 .23 0 00 3. 23 0 00 0. 00 3 23 0. 00 0 00 3. 23  25 14 12 14 6 6 8 8 7 4 2 5 1 2 1 2 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0  89 29 50 .00 42 86 50 .00 21 43 21 .43 28 57 28 .57 25. 00 14 .29 7 14 17 .86 3 57 7 .14 3 57 7 .14 0 00 3 .57 7 14 0 .00 3 57 0 00 3 57 3 .57 0 00 0 .00 0. 00 0 .00 0 00 0 .00 0. 00 0 .00 0. 00 3 57 0. 00 0 00 0. 00 0 00 0. 00 0 00 3. 57 0 00 0. 00  82 43 36 33 22 21 19 17 15 12 11 8 8 6 5 4 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  91 .11 47 .78 40 .00 36 .67 24 .44 23 .33 21 .11 18 .89 16 .67 13 .33 12 . 22 8 .89 8 .89 6 .67 5 .56 4 .44 3 .33 3 .33 3 .33 2 . 22 2 .22 2 .22 2 .22 2 . 22 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11 1 .11  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  FOUR YEARS  F I V E YEARS  TOTAL  SAMPLE  f  %  f  1  f  %  f  %  17 12 12 15 11 10 0 3 4 5 4 2 2 2 2 2 0 0 3 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1  53 .13 37 .50 37 .50 46 . 88 34 .38 31 .25 0 .00 9 .38 12 .50 15 .63 12 .50 6 .25 6 . 25 6 . 25 6 .25 6 .25 0 .00 0 . 00 9 .38 3 .13 3 .13 0 .00 3 .13 3 .13 3 .13 0 .00 0 .00 3 .13 3 .13 0 .00 0 .00 3 .13 0 .00 3 .13 0 .00 3 .13 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 0 .00 3 .13 0 .00 3 .13  16 18 15 16 11 5 8 5 2 3 2 5 4 3 2 1 3 1 1 3 0 4 1 1 1 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 1 1 1 1 0  50,.00 56,.25 46,.88 50,.00 34,.38 15,.63 25,.00 15,.63 6,,25 9,.38 6,.25 15,.63 12..50 9,.38 6.,25 3,.13 9.,38 3,.13 3.,13 9,.38 0.,00 12,, 50 3 ,13 . 3,.13 3 .13 . 6,. 25 3 .13 . 0..00 0.,00 6..25 3.,13 0,.00 0.,00 0.,00 3.,13 3., 13 6.,25 0.,00 3 .13 3.,13 3 .13 3.,13 0. 00  10 12 14 8 15 7 4 3 5 2 4 3 1 1 2 2 2 4 1 1 4 0 2 2 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 3 1 1 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 0  35,.71 42,.86 50,.00 28,.57 53,.57 25,• 00 14..29 10,.** 17,.86 7,.14 14,.29 10,.71 3 .57 . 3,.57 7..14 7,.14 7,,14 14.. 29 3 ,57 , 3,.57 14.,29 0,.00 7.,14 7,.14 3 ,57 . 3,.57 7..14 7..14 7..14 3..57 7.,14 7,.14 10..71 3.,57 3 ,57 . 0.,00 0.,00 7.,14 3 .57 3.,57 0.,00 3.,57 0. 00  43 42 41 39 37 22 12 11 11 10 10 10 7 6 6 5 5 5 5 5 5 4 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1  46 .74 45 .65 44 .57 42 .39 40 . 22 23 .91 13 .04 11 .96 11 .96 10 .87 10 .87 10 .87 7 .61 6 .52 6 .52 5 .43 5 .43 5 .43 5 .43 5 .43 5 .43 4 . 35 4 .35 4 .35 3 .26 3 .26 3 .26 3 .26 3 .26 3 .26 3 . 26 3 .26 3 .26 2 .17 2 .17 2 .17 2 .17 2 .17 2 . 17 2 .17 2 .17 2 .17 1 .09  CATEGORY: ZOO LIONS GIRAFFFE ELEPHANT TIGER MONKEY BEARS BIRDS HIPPO KANGAROO HORSE WHALES ZEBRA CAMEL RABBIT SNAKES COW CROCODILE DUCKS FISH GORRILLA POLARBEAR ALLIGATOR SEALS SQUIRREL BUNNY CATS DOGS DONKEY LAMBS MICE PENGUIN SHEEP TURTLES BATS CHICKS FOX OSTRICH PEACOCK PIGS PONIES ROOSTER WOLVES BALOOGA  130  SUBJECT AGE-GROUP THREE YEARS ITEMS  f  BEES BIGCATS BOACONSTR BUTTERFLY CHEETAH CHICKEN DINOSAUR DOLPHIN DRAGON FLAMINGO FROG GUINEAPIG HENS INSECTS JAGUAR KITTY LAUGHYEEN LEOPARD MOO MOOSE OTTERS OWL PARROTS PORCUPINE PUSSYCAT RACOON SLOTH SPIDER WILDPIGS  1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0  % 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  FOUR YEARS f 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0  %  0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 3.13 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.13 0.00 0. 00 0.00 3.13 0.00  F I V E YEARS f  0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1  %  0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 3.57 0.00 3.57  TOTAL SAMPLE f  1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1  %  1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09 1.09  131 APPF.NDIX D Cateaory  Production,Histoqraphs  TWENTY MOST COMMON ITEMS  TWENTY MOST COMMON ITEMS  132  TWENTY MOST COMMON ITEMS  133  TWENTY MOST COMMON ITEMS  TWENTY MOST COMMON ITEMS  134  TWENTY MOST COMMON ITEMS  APPENDIX E Category Line  Drawings  and E l a b o r a t i v e S t u d y Questions  Condition  Clothes Questions: I s a d r e s s s o m e t h i n g t h a t a g i r l w o u l d wear? Do p e o p l e wear h a t s on t h e i r h e a d s ? Do y o u wear s h o e s o u t s i d e ? Do y o u wear s h o r t s on a sunny day? Do most p e o p l e wear u n d e r w e a r u n d e r t h e i r c l o t h e s ? Line  Drawings:  137 Zoo Questions: Do g i r a f f e s have l o n g n e c k s and l i v e i n t h e j u n g l e ? Do monkeys s w i n g i n t r e e s and have l o n g t a i l s ? Can k a n g a r o o s hop a r o u n d on two l e g s ? Do t i g e r s have s t r i p e s , b i g t e e t h and l i v e i n t h e j u n g l e ? Do b e a r s l i k e honey and l i v e i n t h e f o r s t ? Line  Drawings:  138  139 Travel Questions: Can p e o p l e s i t i n t h e f r o n t p a r t o f a t r u c k t o g e t a r i d e ? Does a van h a v e l o t s o f room i n t h e b a c k a n d go on t h e r o a d ? Does a b u s c a r r y l o t s o f p e o p l e and d r i v e on r o a d s ? Can a t r a i n r i d e on r a i l w a y t r a c k s and c a r r y l o t s o f p e o p l e ? Do y o u h a v e t o p e d d l e t o r i d e a b i k e ? Line  Drawings:  • B Q B B B B Q ^  I  141 Playground Questions: Can you go up and down on a t e e t e r - t o t t e r ? Does a merry-go-round t u r n people around i n c i r c l e s ? Can you climb t o t h e top o f a c l i m b e r and hang from t h e top? Do parks sometimes have t o y b r i d g e s f o r k i d s t o p l a y on? Can fun t h i n g s be made out o f t i r e s f o r k i d s t o p l a y on? L i n e Drawings:  142  APPENDIX F A n a l y s i s o f Variance Tables For Chapter  O v e r a l l Anova Source  SS  df  MS  Four  F  P  BETWEEN SUBJECTS Age Error  6567.98 17630.312  2 33  3283.990 534.252  WITHIN SUBJECTS Study Age x S t u d y Error  5916.174 4859.347 24578.729  1 2 33  5916.174 2429.674 744.810  7.943 3.262  .008 .049  Test Age x T e s t Error  96814.323 4719.718 16084.313  2 2 33  96814.323 2359.859 487.403  198.633 4.842  <.001 .014  Study x T e s t Age x S t d y x T s t Error  108.507 2283.681 15366.062  1 2 33  108.507 1141.840 465.638  .233 2.452  .632 .100  194929.145  143  MS  F  P  TOTAL  Anova o f P r i m i n a D a t a Source BETWEEN SUBJECTS Age Error WITHIN SUBJECTS Study Age x S t u d y Error TOTAL  6.147  SS  df  166.253 12236.625  2 33  83.127 370.807  .224  2211.125 513.250 9681.125  1 2 33  2211.125 256.625 293.367  7.537 .875  24808.378  71  .005  .009  144 Anova o f R e c a l l Data Source  SS  df  MS  F  p  BETWEEN SUBJECTS Age Error  11121.444 21478.000  2 33  5560.722 650.840  8.544  .001  WITHIN SUBJECTS Study Age X Study Error  3813.555 6629.778 30263.667  1 2 33  3813.555 3314.889 917.081  4.158 3.615  .047 .037  TOTAL  73306.444  Simple Main E f f e c t s of Source  71  R e c a l l Data SS df  MS  F  BETWEEEN SUBJECTS Between A a t b± Between A a t fc> Within c e l l  1397.031 16349.290 51741.667  2 2 66  698.516 8174.645 783.965  .891 10.427  WITHIN SUBJECTS Between B a t a-^ Between B a t a Between B a t a AB B x Ss w/in grps  10249.013 150.000 42.773 6629.778 30263.667  1 1 1 2 33  10249.013 150.000 42.773 3314.889 917.081  11.176 .164 .046 3.615  TOTAL  73306.444  71  2  2  3  P  <.01  <.01 .037  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0098373/manifest

Comment

Related Items