3~5岁幼儿职业声望垂直空间、大小双重隐喻发展

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2021.04.01

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 为探讨3~5岁幼儿职业声望认知及职业声望垂直空间、大小双重隐喻的发展规律，研究采用将高声望职业人物和低声望职业人物图片放置垂直空间的上方/下方和大/小的人物剪影图片的任务操作。通过2个实验及综合分析结果发现：3岁幼儿职业声望隐喻理解能力开始萌芽，高职业声望为“上”的正极概念隐喻开始出现； 4岁幼儿职业声望隐喻理解能力得到发展，已形成高职业声望为“上”、“大”，低职业声望为“下”、“小”的双重隐喻能力； 5岁幼儿职业声望的双重隐喻能力进一步加强。研究揭示：3~5岁幼儿对职业声望的隐喻加工存在正极优势。幼儿对职业声望的垂直空间和大小双重隐喻理解能力的发展不同步，职业声望的垂直空间隐喻发展优于大小隐喻。

关键词: 3~5岁幼儿, 职业声望, 双重隐喻, 认知发展

Abstract: Images with high-and low-prestige occupational characters were placed above and below a vertical space, and silhouette images of large and small characters were studied to explore the development law of occupational prestige cognition as well as dual vertical space and size metaphors of occupational prestige in children aged 3 to 5 years. Through two experiments and comprehensive analysis, it was determined that metaphor-comprehension ability of occupational prestige and the conceptual metaphor of the positive pole with high occupational prestige, such as ‘up’, begin to emerge at the age of 3 years. At the age of 4 years, children's metaphorical comprehension ability of occupational prestige is developed and has formed multiple metaphorical abilities with high occupational prestige, such as ‘up’ and ‘big’, and low occupational prestige, such as ‘down’ and ‘small’. The ability of a 5-year-old to use multiple metaphors for career prestige is further enhanced. Children between the ages of 3~5 years have a positive advantage in metaphor processing of professional prestige. The development of children's ability to understand multiple vertical space and size metaphors of occupational prestige is yet to be synchronised. Moreover, the development of vertical space metaphors of occupational prestige is better than that of size metaphors.

Key words: 3~5 years old children, occupational prestige, dual metaphors, cognitive development

中图分类号:

B844

贺晓玲, 陈俊, 刘灵, 张甜. 3~5岁幼儿职业声望垂直空间、大小双重隐喻发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2021, 37(4): 457-464.

HE Xiaoling, CHEN Jun, LIU Ling, ZHANG Tian. Cognitive Development of Dual Vertical Space and Size Metaphors of Occupational Prestige Concepts in 3 to 5-year-old Children[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2021, 37(4): 457-464.

参考文献

Aboud, F. (2003). The formation of in-group favoritism and out-group prejudice in young children:Are they distinct attitudes? Developmental Psychology, 39(1), 48-60.
Asch, S., & Nerlove, H. (1960). The development of double-function terms in children. In B. Kaplan, & S. Wapner (Eds.), Perspectives in psychological theory (pp. 47-60). New York:International Universities Press.
Blaker, N. M., & van Vugt, M. (2014). The status-size hypothesis:How cues of physical size and social status influence each other. In J. T. Cheng, J. L. Tracy, & C. Anderson(Eds.).The Psychology of Social Status(pp.119-137). New York, NY:Springer.
Casasanto D. (2009). Embodiment of abstract concepts:Good and bad in right-and left-handers. Journal of Experimental Psychology:General, 138(3), 351-367.
Clark, E. (1972). On the child's acquisition of antonyms in two semantic fields. Journal of Verbal Learning & Verbal Behavior, 11(6), 750-758.
de la Vega, I., Dudschig, C., De Filippis, M., Lachmair, M., & Kaup, B. (2013). Keep your hands crossed:The valence-by-left/right interaction is related to hand, not side, in an incongruent hand-response key assignment. Acta Psychologica, 142(2), 273-277.
Holbrook, C., & Fessler, D. (2013). Sizing up the threat:The envisioned physical formidability of terrorists tracks their leaders' failures and successes. Cognition, 127(1), 46-56.
Lakens, D. (2012). Polarity correspondence in metaphor congruency effects:Structural overlap predicts categorization times for bipolar concepts presented in vertical space. Journal of Experimental Psychology:Learning, Memory, and Cognition, 38(3), 726-736.
Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (Eds.).(1980). Metaphors we live by. Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
Li, V., Spitzer, B., & Olson, K. (2014). Preschoolers reduce inequality while favoring individuals with more. Child Development, 85(3), 1123-1133.
Lourenco, S. F., Bonny, J. W., & Schwartz, B. L. (2016). Children and adults use physical size and numerical alliances in third-party judgments of dominance. Frontiers in Psychology, 6, 1-10.
Mcgonigle, B., & Chalmers, M. (1984). The selective impact of question form and input mode on the symbolic distance effect in children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 37(3), 525-554.
Özçalişkan, S. (2005). On learning to draw the distinction between physical and metaphorical motion:Is metaphor an early emerging cognitive and linguistic capacity? Journal of Child Language, 32(2), 291-318.
Piaget, J. (1962). The relation of affectivity to intelligence in the mental development of the child. Bulletin of the Menninger Clinic, 26(26), 129-137.
Proctor, R., & Cho, Y. (2006). Polarity correspondence:A general principle for performance of speeded binary classification tasks. Psychological Bulletin, 132(3), 416-442.
Rubio-Fernández, P., & Grassmann, S. (2015). Metaphors as second labels:Difficult for preschool children? Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, 45(4), 931-944.
Schubert, T. (2005). Your highness:Vertical positions as perceptual symbols of power. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89(1), 1-21.
Schubert, T., Waldzus, S., & Giessner, S. (2009). Control over the association of power and size. Social Cognition, 27(1), 1-19.
Siltanen, S. A. (1986). "Butterflies are rainbows?":A developmental investigation of metaphor comprehension. Communication Education, 35(1), 1-12.
Stites L., & Özçalişkan Ş. (2013). Developmental changes in children's comprehension and explanation of spatial metaphors for time, Journal of Child Language, 40(5), 1123-1137.
Treiman, D. J. (1976). A standard occupational prestige scale for use with historical data. The Journal of Interdisciplinary History, 7(2), 283-304.
Vosniadou, S., Ortony, A., Reynolds, R. E. & Wilson, P. T. (1984). Sources of difficulty in children's understanding of metaphorical language. Child Development, 55, 1588-1606. Reprinted in M. B. Franklin & S. S. Barten (Eds.) (1988), Child Language:A Reader. Oxford, England:Oxford University Press.
胡德明. (2003). 儿童空问维度形容词发展顺序的理论解释. 世界汉语教学, 65(3), 61-66.
李春玲. (2005). 当代中国社会的声望分层——职业声望与社会经济地位指数测量. 社会学研究, 20(2), 74-102.
李其维. (2008)."认知科学"与"第二代认知科学"刍议.心理学报, 40(12), 1306-1327.
卿石松. (2019). 中国性别收入差距的社会文化根源——基于性别角色观念的经验分析. 社会学研究, 34(1), 106-131.
唐佩佩, 叶浩生, 杜建政. (2015). 权力概念与空间大小:具身隐喻的视角. 心理学报,47(4), 514-521.
尉建文,赵延东. (2011). 权力还是声望?——社会资本测量的争论与验证. 社会学研究, 26(3), 64-83.
许晓迪. (2010). 现代汉语社会地位的空间隐喻实验研究(硕士学位论文). 上海师范大学.
殷融, 苏得权, 叶浩生. (2013). 具身认知视角下的概念隐喻理论. 心理科学进展,21(2), 220-234.

相关文章 15

[1]	江盈颖, 安静, 马丽, 朱莉琪. 8~15岁儿童贫富观的发展特点及其与成人的比较[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2022, 38(4): 466-474.
[2]	杜萱, 林嘉懿, 陈黎静. 儿童和青少年的空间—时间隐喻图式[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2020, 36(5): 513-519.
[3]	邹雨晨, 李燕芳, 丁颖. 早期高级认知发展与前额叶功能发育的fNIRS研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2015, 31(6): 761-768.
[4]	唐细容, 蒋莉, 曾慧, 姚树桥. 成人认知功能的发展与老化：一项控制同辈效应的横断研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2013, 29(3): 262-267.
[5]	张佳慧, 辛涛, 陈学峰. 4～5岁儿童认知发展:适龄入园的积极影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2011, 27(5): 475-483.
[6]	张丽, 辛自强, 李红, 林崇德. 探测认知发展的非连续性:思路与方法[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2010, 26(1): 100-106.
[7]	王瑞明, 莫雷, ZHE Chen. 使用微观发生法促进儿童的认知发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2005, 21(1): 124-128.
[8]	黄红清, 张卫. 指向性遗忘中认知抑制能力的发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2003, 19(1): 44-48.
[9]	宋广文, 任真. 漫画认知发展特点的研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2002, 17(3): 24-28.
[10]	郭淑斌, 莫雷. 基于概念复杂度的加工容量观[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2002, 18(2): 92-96.
[11]	张卫, 林崇德. 认知发展的后信息加工观[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2002, 18(1): 86-91.
[12]	倪玉菁. 五、六年级小学生对分数的意义和性质的理解[J]. 心理发展与教育, 1999, 15(4): 26-30.
[13]	张卫, 徐涛, 王穗苹. 我国6-14岁儿童对道德规则和社会习俗的区分与认知[J]. 心理发展与教育, 1998, 14(1): 21-25.
[14]	张登印, 俞国良, 林崇德. 学习不良儿童与一般儿童认知发展、学习动机和家庭资源的比较[J]. 心理发展与教育, 1997, 13(2): 52-56.
[15]	张厚粲, 吴正, 宋华, 柳红. LOGO程序设计教学对儿童元认知能力发展影响的研究[J]. 心理发展与教育, 1994, 10(1): 1-5.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed