Chouinard Michael M
Department of SSHA, University of California, Merced, CA 95344, USA.
Monogr Soc Res Child Dev. 2007;72(1):vii-ix, 1-112; discussion 113-26. doi: 10.1111/j.1540-5834.2007.00412.x.
Preschoolers' questions may play an important role in cognitive development. When children encounter a problem with their current knowledge state (a gap in their knowledge, some ambiguity they do not know how to resolve, some inconsistency they have detected), asking a question allows them to get targeted information exactly when they need it. This information is available to them when they are particularly receptive to it, and because it comes as the result of their own disequilibrium, it may have depth of processing benefits. In that questions allow children to get information they need to move their knowledge structures closer to adult-like states, the ability to ask questions to gather needed information constitutes an efficient mechanism for cognitive development (referred to in this paper as the Information Requesting Mechanism [IRM]; this term is used because it includes question-asking and other information recruiting behaviors such as gestures, expressions, and vocalizations). However, the role of children's questions in their cognitive development has been largely overlooked. If questions are a force in cognitive development, the following must be true: (1) children must actually ask questions that gather information; (2) children must receive informative answers to their questions if they are able to be of use to cognitive development; (3) children must be motivated to get the information they request, rather than asking questions for other purposes such as attention; (4) the questions children ask must be relevant and of potential use to their cognitive development; (5) we must see evidence that children's questions help them in some way-that is, that they can ask questions for a purpose, and use the information they receive purposefully to successfully achieve some change of knowledge state. This monograph reports data on these points. Study 1 analyzed questions taken from four children's transcripts in the CHILDES database (age 1;2-5;1). This methodology allowed detailed, veridical analysis of every question asked by the children during their recording sessions. Results indicate that children ask many information-seeking questions and get informative answers. When they do not get an informative response, they keep asking; attention is not enough. Results also indicate that the content of children's questions parallel their conceptual advances, and shift within an exchange and over the course of development to reflect the learning process. So, these data suggest that the components of the IRM are in place and are used by children from very early in development, and the information they seek changes with time. Study 2 asked whether preverbal children who are not yet asking linguistic questions can recruit information via gestures, expressions, and vocalizations, in addition to further investigating the linguistic questions of older children. This study analyzed questions from a cross-sectional diary study, kept by 68 parents of their children's questions (aged 1;0-5;0). Also, this methodology allowed for data collection over a large number of children, a large range of situational contexts, and allows for the collection of low frequency, high-salience events. Results from Study 2 suggest that all of the components of the IRM are in place, and extends these findings down to younger, preverbal children who recruit information using gesture and vocalizations. Study 3 investigated the questions asked in one specific domain, biological knowledge, and examined the impact that different stimulus types have on children's questions. This study gathered data from 112 parent/child dyads (children aged 2, 3, and 4 years) walking through one of three zoos (one with real animals, one with drawings of animals, and one with three-dimensional replicas of animals), looking at the animals together. Results from this study also suggest that all of the components of the IRM are in place from the earliest age, further supporting the findings from Studies 1 and 2. In addition, while children still ask many nonbiological questions about the animals ("what is its name?"), biological information ("how do babies grow their bees?") is requested with much greater frequency in this study, although this need not necessarily be the case. Further, the nature of these questions suggests they may support the building of conceptual structures within the domain of biological knowledge, at a time just before the age when children make important conceptual changes in this area. Further, the type of stimulus materials used has an impact on the questions children ask; children are less likely to ask deep conceptual questions when looking at drawings or replicas of objects than when looking at the real thing. Finally, Study 4 examines the causal relation between children's questions and change in knowledge state by investigating whether or not children can ask questions in order to gain information that allows them to solve a problem. Sixty-seven 4-year-olds were asked to figure out which of two items were hidden in a box. Half of the children were allowed to ask questions to help them figure this out. Despite many ways in which they could fail to use questions correctly, children who were allowed to ask questions were significantly more likely to identify the object hidden in the box, an overt indication of their change in knowledge state. Further, children relied on their existing conceptual information about the objects to help generate disambiguating questions; even though they had a faster "dumb" method of disambiguating the objects via nonconceptual perceptual information ("is it purple?"), they were just as likely to generate questions that tapped into nonvisible conceptual information ("does it purr?"). These results suggest that children are capable of using their existing knowledge structures to generate questions that change their knowledge state in a way that allows them to productively solve a problem; they further suggest that tapping into existing conceptual knowledge to help process a current situation, and use that knowledge to generate appropriate questions, is an integral part of question asking. Together, the results of these four studies support the existence of the IRM as a way for children to learn about the world. Children ask information-seeking questions that are related in topic and structure to their cognitive development. Parents give answers to these questions, but when they do not, the children persist in asking for the information, suggesting that the goal of this behavior is to recruit needed information. The content of these questions shifts within exchanges and over the course of development in ways that reflect concept building. Finally, children generate questions efficiently in order to gather needed information, and then are able to use this information productively; they tap into their existing conceptual knowledge in order to do this. Thus, the ability to ask questions is a powerful tool that allows children to gather information they need in order to learn about the world and solve problems in it. Implications of this model for cognitive development are discussed.
学龄前儿童的问题可能在认知发展中发挥重要作用。当儿童在其当前知识状态下遇到问题时(知识缺口、不知如何解决的模糊性、察觉到的不一致性),提出问题能让他们在需要时准确获取有针对性的信息。当他们特别容易接受信息时,就能获取到这些信息,而且由于这是他们自身认知失衡的结果,可能会带来深度加工的益处。鉴于问题能让儿童获取使他们的知识结构更接近成人状态所需的信息,提出问题以收集所需信息的能力构成了一种促进认知发展的有效机制(本文中称为信息请求机制[IRM];使用这个术语是因为它包括提问以及其他获取信息的行为,如手势、表情和发声)。然而,儿童问题在其认知发展中的作用在很大程度上被忽视了。如果问题是认知发展的一股力量,那么以下几点必然成立:(1)儿童必须实际提出收集信息的问题;(2)如果这些问题要对认知发展有用,儿童必须得到有信息价值的答案;(3)儿童必须有动力获取他们所请求的信息,而不是为了其他目的(如引起注意)提问;(4)儿童提出的问题必须与他们的认知发展相关且具有潜在用途;(5)我们必须看到证据表明儿童的问题在某些方面对他们有帮助——也就是说,他们能够出于某种目的提问,并有意地利用所获得的信息成功实现知识状态的某种改变。本专著报告了关于这些要点的数据。研究1分析了取自儿童语言数据交换系统(CHILDES)数据库中四名儿童记录(年龄1岁2个月至5岁1个月)的问题。这种方法允许对儿童在记录过程中提出的每个问题进行详细、真实的分析。结果表明,儿童提出许多寻求信息的问题并得到有信息价值的答案。当他们没有得到有信息价值的回答时,会持续提问;仅仅引起注意是不够的。结果还表明,儿童问题的内容与他们概念的进步并行,并在一次交流中以及在发展过程中发生变化,以反映学习过程。所以,这些数据表明信息请求机制的各个组成部分已经存在,并且儿童从很早就开始使用,而且他们所寻求的信息会随时间变化。研究2询问尚未提出语言问题的学前期儿童是否除了能通过语言提问外,还能通过手势、表情和发声来获取信息,此外还进一步研究了年龄较大儿童的语言问题。这项研究分析了一项横断面日记研究中的问题,该研究由68位家长记录他们孩子的问题(年龄1岁0个月至5岁0个月)。而且,这种方法允许针对大量儿童、广泛的情境进行数据收集,并允许收集低频、高显著性事件。研究2的结果表明,信息请求机制的所有组成部分都已存在,并将这些发现扩展到了更年幼、尚未学会说话的儿童,他们通过手势和发声来获取信息。研究3调查了在一个特定领域——生物知识方面提出的问题,并研究了不同刺激类型对儿童问题的影响。这项研究收集了来自112对亲子(孩子年龄为2岁、3岁和4岁)的数据,他们一起走过三个动物园之一(一个有真实动物,一个有动物图片,一个有动物的三维复制品),一起观察动物。这项研究的结果也表明,信息请求机制的所有组成部分从最早的年龄就已存在,进一步支持了研究1和研究2的发现。此外,虽然儿童仍然会问许多关于动物的非生物问题(“它叫什么名字?”),但在本研究中,他们更频繁地请求生物信息(“蜜蜂宝宝是怎么长大的?”),尽管情况不一定如此。此外,这些问题的性质表明,在儿童在该领域进行重要概念转变之前的这个时期,它们可能有助于构建生物知识领域内的概念结构。此外,所使用的刺激材料类型会对儿童提出的问题产生影响;与观察真实物体相比,儿童在观察物体的图片或复制品时不太可能提出深入的概念性问题。最后,研究4通过调查儿童是否能够为了获取能让他们解决问题的信息而提问,来检验儿童问题与知识状态变化之间的因果关系。67名4岁儿童被要求找出藏在盒子里的两个物品中的哪一个。一半的儿童被允许提问以帮助他们找出答案。尽管他们可能有很多不正确使用问题的方式,但被允许提问的儿童显著更有可能识别出藏在盒子里的物品,这是他们知识状态变化的一个明显迹象。此外,儿童依靠他们关于物体的现有概念信息来帮助提出消除歧义的问题;即使他们有一种通过非概念性感知信息(“它是紫色的吗?”)更快地“盲目”消除物体歧义的方法,但他们同样有可能提出利用不可见概念信息的问题(“它会咕噜咕噜叫吗?”)。这些结果表明,儿童能够利用他们现有的知识结构提出能改变他们知识状态的问题,从而使他们能够有效地解决问题;这些结果还进一步表明,利用现有概念知识来帮助处理当前情况,并利用该知识提出适当的问题,是提问的一个组成部分。这四项研究的结果共同支持了信息请求机制的存在,它是儿童了解世界的一种方式。儿童提出与他们认知发展在主题和结构上相关的寻求信息的问题。父母会回答这些问题,但当他们不回答时,儿童会持续请求信息,这表明这种行为的目的是获取所需信息。这些问题的内容在交流过程中以及在发展过程中发生变化,以反映概念构建。最后,儿童有效地提出问题以收集所需信息,然后能够有成效地利用这些信息;他们为此利用自己现有的概念知识。因此,提问的能力是一种强大的工具,它使儿童能够收集他们为了了解世界和解决其中的问题所需的信息。本文讨论了这个模型对认知发展的影响。