Differences in the Evaluation of Generic Statements About Human and Non-Human Categories

Arber Tasimi, Susan A. Gelman, Andrei Cimpian, Joshua Knobe

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Abstract

Generic statements (e.g., "Birds lay eggs") express generalizations about categories. Current theories suggest that people should be especially inclined to accept generics that involve threatening information. However, previous tests of this claim have focused on generics about non-human categories, which raises the question of whether this effect applies as readily to human categories. In Experiment 1, adults were more likely to accept generics involving a threatening (vs. a non-threatening) property for artifacts, but this negativity bias did not also apply to human categories. Experiment 2 examined an alternative hypothesis for this result, and Experiments 3 and 4 served as conceptual replications of the first experiment. Experiment 5 found that even preschoolers apply generics differently for humans and artifacts. Finally, Experiment 6 showed that these effects reflect differences between human and non-human categories more generally, as adults showed a negativity bias for categories of non-human animals, but not for categories of humans. These findings suggest the presence of important, early-emerging domain differences in people's judgments about generics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
JournalCognitive Science
DOIs
StateAccepted/In press - 2016

Fingerprint

Experiments
Artifacts
Eggs
Birds
Evaluation
Nonhuman
Animals
Experiment
Artifact
Negativity Bias
Egg
Nonhuman Animals
Preschoolers
Replication

Keywords

  • Cognitive development
  • Concepts
  • Generic language
  • Psychological essentialism

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Language and Linguistics
  • Experimental and Cognitive Psychology
  • Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Artificial Intelligence

Cite this

Differences in the Evaluation of Generic Statements About Human and Non-Human Categories. / Tasimi, Arber; Gelman, Susan A.; Cimpian, Andrei; Knobe, Joshua.

In: Cognitive Science, 2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ef9dc29dc0eb48d483a02eec6f101715,
title = "Differences in the Evaluation of Generic Statements About Human and Non-Human Categories",
abstract = "Generic statements (e.g., {"}Birds lay eggs{"}) express generalizations about categories. Current theories suggest that people should be especially inclined to accept generics that involve threatening information. However, previous tests of this claim have focused on generics about non-human categories, which raises the question of whether this effect applies as readily to human categories. In Experiment 1, adults were more likely to accept generics involving a threatening (vs. a non-threatening) property for artifacts, but this negativity bias did not also apply to human categories. Experiment 2 examined an alternative hypothesis for this result, and Experiments 3 and 4 served as conceptual replications of the first experiment. Experiment 5 found that even preschoolers apply generics differently for humans and artifacts. Finally, Experiment 6 showed that these effects reflect differences between human and non-human categories more generally, as adults showed a negativity bias for categories of non-human animals, but not for categories of humans. These findings suggest the presence of important, early-emerging domain differences in people's judgments about generics.",
keywords = "Cognitive development, Concepts, Generic language, Psychological essentialism",
author = "Arber Tasimi and Gelman, {Susan A.} and Andrei Cimpian and Joshua Knobe",
year = "2016",
doi = "10.1111/cogs.12440",
language = "English (US)",
journal = "Cognitive Science",
issn = "0364-0213",
publisher = "Wiley-Blackwell",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Differences in the Evaluation of Generic Statements About Human and Non-Human Categories

AU - Tasimi, Arber

AU - Gelman, Susan A.

AU - Cimpian, Andrei

AU - Knobe, Joshua

PY - 2016

Y1 - 2016

N2 - Generic statements (e.g., "Birds lay eggs") express generalizations about categories. Current theories suggest that people should be especially inclined to accept generics that involve threatening information. However, previous tests of this claim have focused on generics about non-human categories, which raises the question of whether this effect applies as readily to human categories. In Experiment 1, adults were more likely to accept generics involving a threatening (vs. a non-threatening) property for artifacts, but this negativity bias did not also apply to human categories. Experiment 2 examined an alternative hypothesis for this result, and Experiments 3 and 4 served as conceptual replications of the first experiment. Experiment 5 found that even preschoolers apply generics differently for humans and artifacts. Finally, Experiment 6 showed that these effects reflect differences between human and non-human categories more generally, as adults showed a negativity bias for categories of non-human animals, but not for categories of humans. These findings suggest the presence of important, early-emerging domain differences in people's judgments about generics.

AB - Generic statements (e.g., "Birds lay eggs") express generalizations about categories. Current theories suggest that people should be especially inclined to accept generics that involve threatening information. However, previous tests of this claim have focused on generics about non-human categories, which raises the question of whether this effect applies as readily to human categories. In Experiment 1, adults were more likely to accept generics involving a threatening (vs. a non-threatening) property for artifacts, but this negativity bias did not also apply to human categories. Experiment 2 examined an alternative hypothesis for this result, and Experiments 3 and 4 served as conceptual replications of the first experiment. Experiment 5 found that even preschoolers apply generics differently for humans and artifacts. Finally, Experiment 6 showed that these effects reflect differences between human and non-human categories more generally, as adults showed a negativity bias for categories of non-human animals, but not for categories of humans. These findings suggest the presence of important, early-emerging domain differences in people's judgments about generics.

KW - Cognitive development

KW - Concepts

KW - Generic language

KW - Psychological essentialism

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84996536343&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84996536343&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1111/cogs.12440

DO - 10.1111/cogs.12440

M3 - Article

C2 - 27886394

AN - SCOPUS:84996536343

JO - Cognitive Science

JF - Cognitive Science

SN - 0364-0213

ER -