The Development of the Motives for Listening in The First Language by Preschool Children
This article presents a psycholinguistic study that aims to elucidate the development of the motives for listening in the first language (L1) by preschool children. The development of the motives for listening by preschool children was studied according to the following criteria: consciousness, stability, and independence. A set of psycholinguistic methodological approaches was used to measure the development of the motives for listening by preschool children. In total, 378 preschool children took part in the present psycholinguistic study. The results of the data analysis revealed several levels that were associated with the development of the motives for listening in the children’s L1. Those levels will be further presented and discussed in the article. To the high level of the motives of listening development were assigned 9,0% of children (n=34), which have the bright motive as a subject of communicative and speaking needs, as the need for sense-forming development. The directness of their listening is directly dependent on the speech motive. They have stable motives, as well as a strong motivation of achievement. To the average level of the motives of listening development were referred 12,3% of children (n=48), in which the communicative and speaking needs, as the needs of the understanding of other people’s opinions are not sufficiently expressed, however, others – non-ideal – objects of need prevail; the speech motive is not at the required stage of development in order to become an objectified need; this is the degree on which the meanings of the speech needs are only begin and the primary acquisition of it is specification as the need for sense-formation. Motives are unstable, non-independent, mostly due to training tasks. This is the state of the initial development of the speech motive. To a level below the average, 52,6% of children (n=198) were identified, which did not reveal the motives of forming meaning, that induced listening; their perception and understanding is polymotivated, it is excited by several motives, predominantly non-verbal ones; the need for communication and speech comprehension are not associated with subsequent speech behavior; the communicative and speaking needs in the sense of the heard remain uncertain and not specified. To a low level of the motive of listening development were assigned 25,5% of children (n=98), in which the auditing needs in meeting communicative requests are realized only in non-verbal kinds of activities.
Akimova, M.K. (ed.) (2005). Psihologicheskaja diagnostika [Psychological Diagnosis]. St. Petersburg : Peter [in Russian].
Barbosa, P.G., & Nicoladis, E. (2016). Deverbal compound comprehensionin preschool children. Mental Lexicon, 11 (1), 94–114. doi: 10.1075/ml.11.1.05bar
Billow, R.M. (1981).Observing Spontaneous Metaphor in Children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 31(3), 430–445. doi: 10.1016/0022-0965(81)90028-X
Boyle,W., Lindell, A., & Kidd, E. (2013). Investigating the Role of Verbal Working Memory in Young Children’s Sentence Comprehension. Language Learning, 63 (2), 211–242. doi: 10.1111/lang.12003
Choi, Y., & Mazuka, R. (2003).Young Children’s Use of Prosodyin Sentence Parsing. Journal of Psycholinguist Research, 32 (2), 197–217. doi: 10.1023/A:1022400424874
Creel, S.C., Rojo, D.P., & Paullada, A.N. (2016). Effects of contextual support on preschoolers' accented speech comprehension. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 146, 156–180. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2016.01.018.
DeRuiter, L.E., Theakston, A.L., Brandt, S., & Lieven, E.V.M. (2018). Iconicity affects children’s comprehension of complex sentences: The role ofs emantics, clauseorder, input and individual differences. Cognition, 171, 202–224. doi: 0.1016/j.cognition.2017.10.015
Eliseeva, N., Gutsc, E., & Marini, A. (2017). Comprehension of idiomatic expressions by Russian speaking typically developing children. Psychologyin Russia: State of the Art, 10 (4), 22–32. doi: 10.11621/pir.2017.0403
Federmeier, K.D. (2007). Thinking a head: the role and roots of prediction in language comprehension. Psychophysiology, 44(4), 491–505. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8986.2007.00531.x
Glozman, Zh.M. (2012). Nejropsihologicheskoe obsledovanie: kachestvennaja i kolichestvennaja ocenka dannyh [Neuropsychological examination: qualitative and quantitativeas sessment of data]. Moscow : Smysl [in Russian].
Glucksberg, S. (2001). Understanding figurative language: From metaphor to idioms. Oxford: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195111095.001.0001
Gutkina, N.I. (2000). Psihologicheskaja gotovnost k shkole [Psychological readiness for school]. Moscow : Academic Project [in Russian].
Huettig, F., & Mani, N. (2015). Is Prediction Necessary to Underst and Language? Probably not. Language, Cognition, and Neuroscience, 31 (1), 19–31. doi: 10.1080/23273798.2015.1072223
Hurewitz, F., Brown-Schmidt, S., & Thorpe, K. et al. (2009). One Frog, Two Frog, Red Frog, Blue Frog: Factors Affecting Children’s Syntactic Choicesin Production and Comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguist Research, 29 (6), 597–626. doi: 10.1023/A:1026468209238
Kalmykova, L.A. (2009). Psiholingvisticheskie osobennosti motivacii rechevoj dejatelnosti u detej starshego doshkolnogo vozrasta [Psycholinguistic features of motivation of speech activity of senior preschool age children], Proceedings from MIIM’ 09: Mezhdunarodnaja nauchno-prakticheskaja konferencija “Aktualnye problemy rechevogo i lingvisticheskogo razvitija detej doshkolnogo i mladshego shkolnogo vozrasta” – The abstract of International Scientific and Practical Conference “Actual problems of speech and linguistic development of preschool and primary school children”, (pp. 123–125).Orel: Izd-vo OGU [in Russian].
Kalmykova, L.O. (2011). Psihologіja rozvitku movlennєvoji dіjalnostі dіtej doshkіlnogo vіku [Psychology of development of speech activity of preschool age children]. Doctor’s thesis. Kyiv [in Ukrainian].
Lapshina, Ju. (2010). Nejropsihologichesij podhod k diagnostike narushenija ponimanija logiko-grammaticheskih konstrukcij jazyka u detej 4-6 let [Neuropsychological approach to the diagnosis of a violation of the understanding of logical and grammatical language constructsin 4-6 years old children]. Izvestija Uralskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta – News of the Ural Stat University, 6 (85), 122–135 [in Russian].
Leontev, A.N. (1983). Izbrannye psihologicheskie proizvedenija [Selected psychological works]. In V.V. Davydov, V.P. Zinchenko, A.A. Leontev (Eds.).(Vols. 1-2). Moscow : Pedagogika [in Russian].
Leontiev, A.N. (1974). Obshchee ponyatie o deyatelnosti [General concept of ctivities], Osnovy teorii rechevoj deyatelnosti – Fundamentals of the theory of speech activity. Moscow : Nauka [in Russian].
Morozova, N.G.(1947). O ponimanii teksta [On text understanding]. Izvestija APN RSFSR – News from APS RSFSR, 7, 191–240 [in Russian].
Mysan, І.V. (2014). Psihologіchnі osoblivostі sprijmannja і ovolodіnnja dіtmi doshkіlnogo vіku frazeologіzmami rіdnoї movi. Aktualnі problemi psihologії – Actual problems of psychology, ІV (10), 150–161 [in Ukrainian].
Peelle, J., & Mitchell, S. (2015). Sommers Prediction and constraintin audiovisual speech perception. Cortex, 68, 169–181. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.03.006
Rondal, J.A., Thibaut, J.P., Cession, A., Brédart, S., & Kaens, A.M. (1988). Semantic and syntactic factors in children’s comprehension of passives. Applied Linguistics Papers, 12, 79–102.
Sedov, K.F. (2004). Diskurs i lichnost: jevoljucija kommunikativnoj kompetencii [Discourse and personality: the evolution of communicative competence]. Moscow : Labirint [in Russian].
Semenovich, A.V. (2002). Nejropsihologicheskaja diagnostika I korrekcija v detskom vozraste [Neuropsychological diagnosis and correctionin childhood]. Moscow : Akademija [in Russian].
Sobotovich, E.F. (2003). Rechevoe nedorazvitie u detej I puti ego korrekcii : (deti s narusheniem intellekta I motornoj alaliej) [Speechu nderdevelopment in children and the ways of its correction: (children with intellectual disability and motor alalia)]. Moscow : Klassiksstil [in Russian].
Statnikov, A.I. (2015). Sindromnyj analiz trudnostej v ponimanii detmi logiko-grammaticheskih konstrukcij. Nacionalnyj psihologicheskij zhurnal – National Psychological Journal, 2 (18), 77–86 [in Russian].
Tavano A., & Scharinger, M. (2015). Prediction in speech and language processing. Cortex, 68, 1–7. doi: 10.1016/j.cortex.2015.05.001.
Tsvetkova, L.S. (2001). Afazija I vosstanovitelnoe obuchenie [Aphasia and Rehabilitation Training]. Moscow : MPSI [in Russian].
Young-Suk, & Grace Kim (2016). Direct and mediated effects of language and cognitive skills on comprehension of oral narrative texts (listening comprehension) for children. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 141, 101–120. doi: 10.1016/j.jecp.2015.08.003
Zagzebzki, L. (2001). Recovering Understanding. Knowledge, Truth, and Duty: Essays on Epistemic Justification, Responsibility, and Virtue. In Matthias Steup (Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press. doi: 10.1093/0195128923.001.0001
Abstract views: 669 PDF Downloads: 102 PDF Downloads: 65
Copyright (c) 2018 Psycholinguistics
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.