Exam 9: Language and Thought-Part B

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)Snedeker and colleagues (2007)studied the acquisition of English as a second language in preschool children adopted from China.In trying to disentangle the role of linguistic and cognitive development on language acquisition,which factor would serve as the MOST appropriate control group?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario II Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study: Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293 Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card. In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses. Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks. -(Scenario II)The results of this experiment illustrate the role of emotional experience on decision making.Choice situations involving probabilistic outcomes often elicit feelings of anxiety,operationally defined in this study as:

Use the following to answer questions Scenario II Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study: Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293 Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card. In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses. Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks. -(Scenario II)Which factor was NOT a dependent variable?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario II Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study: Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293 Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card. In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses. Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks. -(Scenario II)The results of this experiment suggest that individuals with this particular brain damage exhibit the GREATEST deficits in the ability to:

Use the following to answer questions Scenario II Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study: Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293 Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card. In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses. Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks. -(Scenario II)Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied patients with brain damage in which areas?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)Snedeker and colleagues (2007)refers to their research program as a "natural experiment." However,for which reason is it NOT an example of a true experimental design?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)Which statement is an example of interpreting orderly changes in language development as a result of emerging cognitive skills?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)Which data set in Figure 9.1 provides the MOST support for the contention that language development is critically dependent on experience with the language?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)Which reason BEST explains why the research question posed in Scenario I could not be answered by studying infants' acquisition of the English language and comparing it with infants' acquisition of the Spanish language in American-born bilingual homes?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)In a second study,Snedeker and colleagues (2012)found that older (e.g. ,5 year-old)internationally adopted children acquiring English as a second language began correctly using words pertaining to time (e.g. ,yesterday,tomorrow)earlier in their exposure to English than did monolingual infant controls.This observed difference is BEST interpreted as:

Use the following to answer questions Scenario I Scenario I is based on and presents results consistent with the following studies: Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2012).Disentangling the effects of cognitive development and linguistic expertise: A longitudinal study of the acquisition of English in internationally-adopted children.Cognitive Psychology,65(1),39-76.doi:10.1016/j.cogpsych.2012.01.004 Snedeker,J. ,Geren,J. ,& Shafto,C.L.(2007).Starting over: International adoption as a natural experiment in language development.Psychological Science,18(1),79-87.doi:10.1111/j.1467-9280.2007.01852.x Language development occurs in orderly stages,beginning with one-word utterances and progressing to two-word utterances,simple sentences containing function morphemes,and the emergence of grammatical rules.Psycholinguists have attempted to determine if language development is a consequence of cognitive development or if it reflects linguistic processes that occur independently of general cognitive development.Studies on the acquisition of a second language in internationally adopted children have provided insight into this research question.In a series of studies,Snedeker and colleagues (2007,2012)studied the acquisition of the English language in adopted preschoolers from China.These children had no exposure to the English language before being adopted by families in the United States. Figure 9.1 -(Scenario I)Figure 9.1 shows the number of verbs,expressed as a percentage of total English vocabulary,between 6 and 24 months of exposure to the English language in internationally adopted preschoolers from China and monolingual infants.Four fabricated sets of data (labeled A-D)are shown.Which data set provides the MOST support for the contention that cognitive factors play a role in language development?

Use the following to answer questions Scenario II Scenario II is based on and presents results consistent with the following study: Bechara,A. ,Damasio,H. ,Tranel,D. ,& Damasio,A.R.(1997).Deciding advantageously before knowing the advantageous strategy.Science,275(5304),1293-1295.doi:10.1126/science.275.5304.1293 Bechara and colleagues (1997)studied risky decision making on a gambling task in patients with brain damage in an area critically involved in executive functions such as planning and decision making.They compared this performance with the performance of control participants without brain damage.All participants were given a starting bankroll of $2,000 in facsimile dollars.In the baseline condition,participants chose cards from among four decks.Selecting cards from decks A and B sometimes resulted in a win of $100.Selecting cards from decks C and D sometimes resulted in a win of $50.No losses were incurred in this condition.In the subsequent experimental condition,however,some cards in all decks produced losses.The losses in decks A and B were large and occurred frequently enough to possibly result in bankruptcy.The losses in decks C and D were considerably smaller.Bechara and colleagues measured deck selection and the galvanic skin response (GSR)both prior to (anticipatory)and after (post-outcome)turning over each card. In the baseline condition,all participants in both groups showed a clear preference for decks A and B.Both groups showed small but reliable anticipatory and post-outcome GSRs.In the experimental condition,with continued play the controls exhibited a clear preference for decks C and D,while the patients continued to play more from decks A and B.Relative to the baseline condition,controls exhibited a much larger anticipatory GSR prior to each decision,whereas the patients' anticipatory GSR was small and similar to that obtained under the baseline condition.The post-outcome GSRs were similar in the two groups and occurred to both wins and losses. Interestingly,the investigator systematically interrupted play during the experimental condition and asked all participants if they had developed a game strategy.With continued play,most of the control participants labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Among the patients with brain damage,only half eventually labeled decks A and B as "the bad decks." Remarkably,in both groups,this realization did not affect game play.The minority of the control group who did not express a negative opinion about decks A and B nevertheless tended to avoid those decks.Similarly,the patients who acknowledged that decks C and D were risky nevertheless preferred those decks. -(Scenario II)What can be accurately inferred from Scenario II?