How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements
Abstract How people conceptualize learning is related to real-world educational consequences across many domains of education. Despite its centrality to the educational system, we know little about how the public reasons about language acquisition, and the potential consequences for their thinking a...
| Main Authors: | , , , |
|---|---|
| Format: | Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
SpringerOpen
2023-05-01
|
| Series: | Cognitive Research |
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00481-2 |
| _version_ | 1797832241527652352 |
|---|---|
| author | Xin Sun Shaylene E. Nancekivell Priti Shah Susan A. Gelman |
| author_facet | Xin Sun Shaylene E. Nancekivell Priti Shah Susan A. Gelman |
| author_sort | Xin Sun |
| collection | DOAJ |
| description | Abstract How people conceptualize learning is related to real-world educational consequences across many domains of education. Despite its centrality to the educational system, we know little about how the public reasons about language acquisition, and the potential consequences for their thinking about real-world issues (e.g., policy endorsements). The current studies examined people’s essentialist beliefs about language acquisition (e.g., that language is innate and biologically based), then investigated how individual differences in these beliefs related to the endorsement of educational myths and policies. We probed several dimensions of essentialist beliefs, including that language acquisition is innate, genetically based, and wired in the brain. In two studies, we tested specific hypotheses regarding the extent to which people use essentialist thinking when reasoning about: learning a specific language (e.g., Korean), learning a first language more generally, and learning two or more languages. Across studies, participants were more likely to essentialize the ability to learn multiple languages than one’s first language, and more likely to essentialize the learning of multiple languages and one’s first language than the learning of a particular language. We also found substantial individual differences in the degree to which participants essentialized language acquisition. In both studies, these individual differences correlated with an endorsement of language-related educational neuromyths (Study 1 and pre-registered Study 2), and rejection of educational policies that promote multilingual education (Study 2). Together, these studies reveal the complexity of how people reason about language acquisition and its corresponding educational consequences. |
| first_indexed | 2024-04-09T14:05:46Z |
| format | Article |
| id | doaj.art-b43baaf620ba4fe4b6dd399421eedfb4 |
| institution | Directory Open Access Journal |
| issn | 2365-7464 |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2024-04-09T14:05:46Z |
| publishDate | 2023-05-01 |
| publisher | SpringerOpen |
| record_format | Article |
| series | Cognitive Research |
| spelling | doaj.art-b43baaf620ba4fe4b6dd399421eedfb42023-05-07T11:03:21ZengSpringerOpenCognitive Research2365-74642023-05-018111510.1186/s41235-023-00481-2How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsementsXin Sun0Shaylene E. Nancekivell1Priti Shah2Susan A. Gelman3University of MichiganUniversity of ManitobaUniversity of MichiganUniversity of MichiganAbstract How people conceptualize learning is related to real-world educational consequences across many domains of education. Despite its centrality to the educational system, we know little about how the public reasons about language acquisition, and the potential consequences for their thinking about real-world issues (e.g., policy endorsements). The current studies examined people’s essentialist beliefs about language acquisition (e.g., that language is innate and biologically based), then investigated how individual differences in these beliefs related to the endorsement of educational myths and policies. We probed several dimensions of essentialist beliefs, including that language acquisition is innate, genetically based, and wired in the brain. In two studies, we tested specific hypotheses regarding the extent to which people use essentialist thinking when reasoning about: learning a specific language (e.g., Korean), learning a first language more generally, and learning two or more languages. Across studies, participants were more likely to essentialize the ability to learn multiple languages than one’s first language, and more likely to essentialize the learning of multiple languages and one’s first language than the learning of a particular language. We also found substantial individual differences in the degree to which participants essentialized language acquisition. In both studies, these individual differences correlated with an endorsement of language-related educational neuromyths (Study 1 and pre-registered Study 2), and rejection of educational policies that promote multilingual education (Study 2). Together, these studies reveal the complexity of how people reason about language acquisition and its corresponding educational consequences.https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00481-2Language acquisitionPsychological essentialismBilingualismMultilingualismEducational policyNeuromyths |
| spellingShingle | Xin Sun Shaylene E. Nancekivell Priti Shah Susan A. Gelman How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements Cognitive Research Language acquisition Psychological essentialism Bilingualism Multilingualism Educational policy Neuromyths |
| title | How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements |
| title_full | How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements |
| title_fullStr | How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements |
| title_full_unstemmed | How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements |
| title_short | How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements |
| title_sort | how essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements |
| topic | Language acquisition Psychological essentialism Bilingualism Multilingualism Educational policy Neuromyths |
| url | https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-023-00481-2 |
| work_keys_str_mv | AT xinsun howessentialistreasoningaboutlanguageacquisitionrelatestoeducationalmythsandpolicyendorsements AT shayleneenancekivell howessentialistreasoningaboutlanguageacquisitionrelatestoeducationalmythsandpolicyendorsements AT pritishah howessentialistreasoningaboutlanguageacquisitionrelatestoeducationalmythsandpolicyendorsements AT susanagelman howessentialistreasoningaboutlanguageacquisitionrelatestoeducationalmythsandpolicyendorsements |