Children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow

•Preschoolers’ temporal judgments are affected by both cognitive and linguistic factors.•Cognitively, forward temporal reasoning is easier for preschoolers than backward temporal reasoning.•Linguistically, preschoolers understand the term yesterday better than tomorrow. A picture–sentence matching t...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of experimental child psychology 2018-06, Vol.170, p.107-133
Hauptverfasser: Zhang, Meng, Hudson, Judith A.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 133
container_issue
container_start_page 107
container_title Journal of experimental child psychology
container_volume 170
creator Zhang, Meng
Hudson, Judith A.
description •Preschoolers’ temporal judgments are affected by both cognitive and linguistic factors.•Cognitively, forward temporal reasoning is easier for preschoolers than backward temporal reasoning.•Linguistically, preschoolers understand the term yesterday better than tomorrow. A picture–sentence matching task was used to investigate children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow. In Experiment 1, 3- to 5-year-olds viewed two pictures of an object with a visible change of state (e.g., a carved pumpkin and an intact pumpkin) while listening to sentences referring to past or future actions (“I carved the pumpkin yesterday” or “I’m gonna carve the pumpkin tomorrow”) and selected the matching picture. Children performed better with past tense sentences than with future tense sentences, and including tomorrow in future tense sentences increased accuracy. In the next two experiments, 4- and 5-year-olds (Experiment 2) and adults (Experiment 3) completed the same task but with sentences containing conflicting temporal information (“I carved the pumpkin tomorrow”). Children tended to select pictures depicting the outcome of actions regardless of tense or temporal adverb, whereas adults’ judgments were based on temporal adverbs. In Experiment 4, 3- to 5-year-olds completed tasks requiring either forward or backward temporal reasoning about sentences referring to before, after, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Across sentence types, forward temporal reasoning was easier for children than backward temporal reasoning. Altogether, results indicated that children understand yesterday better than tomorrow due to the increased cognitive demands involved in reasoning about future events.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/j.jecp.2018.01.010
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2007114998</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>S0022096517305532</els_id><sourcerecordid>2007114998</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-7b5472f7897b79b7958e68d8961a5433b06b4c1e4656c511e70d1325d8c1e2a53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9UE1Lw0AQXUSxtfoHPEiOXhJnNvuRgBcpfkHBi56XZHeqCW1Sd1OlN_-Gf89f4paqR-HBMI_3HjOPsVOEDAHVRZu1ZFcZBywywAjYY2OEUqUgpN5nYwDO07jLETsKoQVAVCI_ZCNeCsU112Mmpi_Nwnnqvj4-Q7LuHPkwVJ1ruueknycbCgN5V22SyCVDv-y979-P2cG8WgQ6-ZkT9nRz_Ti9S2cPt_fTq1lqc6mGVNdSaD7XRalrXUbIglThilJhJUWe16BqYZGEkspKRNLgMOfSFZHklcwn7HyXu_L96zqeYpZNsLRYVB3162A4gEYUZVlEKd9Jre9D8DQ3K98sK78xCGbblmnNti2zbcsARkA0nf3kr-sluT_Lbz1RcLkTUPzyrSFvgm2os-QaT3Ywrm_-y_8G6o56fQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2007114998</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow</title><source>ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)</source><creator>Zhang, Meng ; Hudson, Judith A.</creator><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Meng ; Hudson, Judith A.</creatorcontrib><description>•Preschoolers’ temporal judgments are affected by both cognitive and linguistic factors.•Cognitively, forward temporal reasoning is easier for preschoolers than backward temporal reasoning.•Linguistically, preschoolers understand the term yesterday better than tomorrow. A picture–sentence matching task was used to investigate children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow. In Experiment 1, 3- to 5-year-olds viewed two pictures of an object with a visible change of state (e.g., a carved pumpkin and an intact pumpkin) while listening to sentences referring to past or future actions (“I carved the pumpkin yesterday” or “I’m gonna carve the pumpkin tomorrow”) and selected the matching picture. Children performed better with past tense sentences than with future tense sentences, and including tomorrow in future tense sentences increased accuracy. In the next two experiments, 4- and 5-year-olds (Experiment 2) and adults (Experiment 3) completed the same task but with sentences containing conflicting temporal information (“I carved the pumpkin tomorrow”). Children tended to select pictures depicting the outcome of actions regardless of tense or temporal adverb, whereas adults’ judgments were based on temporal adverbs. In Experiment 4, 3- to 5-year-olds completed tasks requiring either forward or backward temporal reasoning about sentences referring to before, after, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Across sentence types, forward temporal reasoning was easier for children than backward temporal reasoning. Altogether, results indicated that children understand yesterday better than tomorrow due to the increased cognitive demands involved in reasoning about future events.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0022-0965</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1096-0457</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2018.01.010</identifier><identifier>PMID: 29462727</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Cognitive processes ; Conceptual development ; Event representation ; Temporal language ; Temporal reasoning ; Time</subject><ispartof>Journal of experimental child psychology, 2018-06, Vol.170, p.107-133</ispartof><rights>2018 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-7b5472f7897b79b7958e68d8961a5433b06b4c1e4656c511e70d1325d8c1e2a53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-7b5472f7897b79b7958e68d8961a5433b06b4c1e4656c511e70d1325d8c1e2a53</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.01.010$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,3550,27924,27925,45995</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29462727$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Meng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hudson, Judith A.</creatorcontrib><title>Children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow</title><title>Journal of experimental child psychology</title><addtitle>J Exp Child Psychol</addtitle><description>•Preschoolers’ temporal judgments are affected by both cognitive and linguistic factors.•Cognitively, forward temporal reasoning is easier for preschoolers than backward temporal reasoning.•Linguistically, preschoolers understand the term yesterday better than tomorrow. A picture–sentence matching task was used to investigate children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow. In Experiment 1, 3- to 5-year-olds viewed two pictures of an object with a visible change of state (e.g., a carved pumpkin and an intact pumpkin) while listening to sentences referring to past or future actions (“I carved the pumpkin yesterday” or “I’m gonna carve the pumpkin tomorrow”) and selected the matching picture. Children performed better with past tense sentences than with future tense sentences, and including tomorrow in future tense sentences increased accuracy. In the next two experiments, 4- and 5-year-olds (Experiment 2) and adults (Experiment 3) completed the same task but with sentences containing conflicting temporal information (“I carved the pumpkin tomorrow”). Children tended to select pictures depicting the outcome of actions regardless of tense or temporal adverb, whereas adults’ judgments were based on temporal adverbs. In Experiment 4, 3- to 5-year-olds completed tasks requiring either forward or backward temporal reasoning about sentences referring to before, after, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Across sentence types, forward temporal reasoning was easier for children than backward temporal reasoning. Altogether, results indicated that children understand yesterday better than tomorrow due to the increased cognitive demands involved in reasoning about future events.</description><subject>Cognitive processes</subject><subject>Conceptual development</subject><subject>Event representation</subject><subject>Temporal language</subject><subject>Temporal reasoning</subject><subject>Time</subject><issn>0022-0965</issn><issn>1096-0457</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2018</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNp9UE1Lw0AQXUSxtfoHPEiOXhJnNvuRgBcpfkHBi56XZHeqCW1Sd1OlN_-Gf89f4paqR-HBMI_3HjOPsVOEDAHVRZu1ZFcZBywywAjYY2OEUqUgpN5nYwDO07jLETsKoQVAVCI_ZCNeCsU112Mmpi_Nwnnqvj4-Q7LuHPkwVJ1ruueknycbCgN5V22SyCVDv-y979-P2cG8WgQ6-ZkT9nRz_Ti9S2cPt_fTq1lqc6mGVNdSaD7XRalrXUbIglThilJhJUWe16BqYZGEkspKRNLgMOfSFZHklcwn7HyXu_L96zqeYpZNsLRYVB3162A4gEYUZVlEKd9Jre9D8DQ3K98sK78xCGbblmnNti2zbcsARkA0nf3kr-sluT_Lbz1RcLkTUPzyrSFvgm2os-QaT3Ywrm_-y_8G6o56fQ</recordid><startdate>201806</startdate><enddate>201806</enddate><creator>Zhang, Meng</creator><creator>Hudson, Judith A.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201806</creationdate><title>Children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow</title><author>Zhang, Meng ; Hudson, Judith A.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c356t-7b5472f7897b79b7958e68d8961a5433b06b4c1e4656c511e70d1325d8c1e2a53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2018</creationdate><topic>Cognitive processes</topic><topic>Conceptual development</topic><topic>Event representation</topic><topic>Temporal language</topic><topic>Temporal reasoning</topic><topic>Time</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Zhang, Meng</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hudson, Judith A.</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of experimental child psychology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Zhang, Meng</au><au>Hudson, Judith A.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow</atitle><jtitle>Journal of experimental child psychology</jtitle><addtitle>J Exp Child Psychol</addtitle><date>2018-06</date><risdate>2018</risdate><volume>170</volume><spage>107</spage><epage>133</epage><pages>107-133</pages><issn>0022-0965</issn><eissn>1096-0457</eissn><abstract>•Preschoolers’ temporal judgments are affected by both cognitive and linguistic factors.•Cognitively, forward temporal reasoning is easier for preschoolers than backward temporal reasoning.•Linguistically, preschoolers understand the term yesterday better than tomorrow. A picture–sentence matching task was used to investigate children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow. In Experiment 1, 3- to 5-year-olds viewed two pictures of an object with a visible change of state (e.g., a carved pumpkin and an intact pumpkin) while listening to sentences referring to past or future actions (“I carved the pumpkin yesterday” or “I’m gonna carve the pumpkin tomorrow”) and selected the matching picture. Children performed better with past tense sentences than with future tense sentences, and including tomorrow in future tense sentences increased accuracy. In the next two experiments, 4- and 5-year-olds (Experiment 2) and adults (Experiment 3) completed the same task but with sentences containing conflicting temporal information (“I carved the pumpkin tomorrow”). Children tended to select pictures depicting the outcome of actions regardless of tense or temporal adverb, whereas adults’ judgments were based on temporal adverbs. In Experiment 4, 3- to 5-year-olds completed tasks requiring either forward or backward temporal reasoning about sentences referring to before, after, yesterday, today, and tomorrow. Across sentence types, forward temporal reasoning was easier for children than backward temporal reasoning. Altogether, results indicated that children understand yesterday better than tomorrow due to the increased cognitive demands involved in reasoning about future events.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>29462727</pmid><doi>10.1016/j.jecp.2018.01.010</doi><tpages>27</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0022-0965
ispartof Journal of experimental child psychology, 2018-06, Vol.170, p.107-133
issn 0022-0965
1096-0457
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2007114998
source ScienceDirect Journals (5 years ago - present)
subjects Cognitive processes
Conceptual development
Event representation
Temporal language
Temporal reasoning
Time
title Children’s understanding of yesterday and tomorrow
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-04T01%3A45%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Children%E2%80%99s%20understanding%20of%20yesterday%20and%20tomorrow&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20experimental%20child%20psychology&rft.au=Zhang,%20Meng&rft.date=2018-06&rft.volume=170&rft.spage=107&rft.epage=133&rft.pages=107-133&rft.issn=0022-0965&rft.eissn=1096-0457&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/j.jecp.2018.01.010&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2007114998%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2007114998&rft_id=info:pmid/29462727&rft_els_id=S0022096517305532&rfr_iscdi=true