Volume 15, Issue 4 (Winter 2014)
Advances in Cognitive Sciences 2014, 15(4): 29-36 |
Back to browse issues page
1- Assistant Professor, Family Institute, Shahid Beheshti University (GC), Tehran, Iran.
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University (GC), Tehran, Iran.
3- MA student, Department of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University (GC), Tehran,Iran.
2- Assistant Professor, Department of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University (GC), Tehran, Iran.
3- MA student, Department of Linguistics, Shahid Beheshti University (GC), Tehran,Iran.
Abstract: (3468 Views)
Introduction: Categorization of concepts is one of the most basic productivefunctions ofhuman language and cognition. The present research intended to explore whether cognitive categorization methods in blind and semi- blind students differs from their sighted peers.
Method: Two groups of blind, semi-blind as well as sighted students were recruited in the current research. Subjects were chosen from the two provinces of Qom and Yazd.The sampling method from the mentioned population was purposive and specifically matched. Based on the matched pair sampling method, subjects of the blind students group were selectedbefore the sighted students group.Students from the sighted group were matched with the blind and semi-blind groupsforsocialfactors, educationalstatus, parents’ occupation and education, residence and economic status. All hundred and sixty students were studying in primary school (preschool to the fifth grade). Ninety six, twenty four and forty of these students were sighted, semi- blind and blind, respectively.
Results: Results were analyzed via quantitatively and qualitatively methods. Analysis of the results revealeda higher mean rank of sighted student group in cognitive categorization methods compared to their blind peers. Results showed that the sighted children were significantly different with regard to their applied cognitive concepts-categorization methods based on defining features, prototypes (characteristic features) and theory-based view of meanings compared to their blind peers. These results highlight the fact that sighted students pointed to the main and the most distinctive features of categories. Features mentioned by the sighted group hada higher cue validity compared to that of the blind group. Moreover, results from the qualitative analysis declared that features mentioned by the sighted groups were of a more diverse type as compared to those by of blind groups. Students of the sighted group considered the main and most distinctive features of categories as well as their subsidiary features.
Conclusion: the type of diverse replies from the sighted group demonstrated that while the blind and semi-blind group students predominantly used astereotyped speech, their sighted peers were more aware of the features of different categories. It seems that their knowledge of different categories is based on what they learned from their school lessons or what they perceived by other perceptual systems. Above findings may be also attributed to determinant factors such as limited cognitive map data, weakness in recalling more than one pattern at a time, and the lack of direct experience.
Method: Two groups of blind, semi-blind as well as sighted students were recruited in the current research. Subjects were chosen from the two provinces of Qom and Yazd.The sampling method from the mentioned population was purposive and specifically matched. Based on the matched pair sampling method, subjects of the blind students group were selectedbefore the sighted students group.Students from the sighted group were matched with the blind and semi-blind groupsforsocialfactors, educationalstatus, parents’ occupation and education, residence and economic status. All hundred and sixty students were studying in primary school (preschool to the fifth grade). Ninety six, twenty four and forty of these students were sighted, semi- blind and blind, respectively.
Results: Results were analyzed via quantitatively and qualitatively methods. Analysis of the results revealeda higher mean rank of sighted student group in cognitive categorization methods compared to their blind peers. Results showed that the sighted children were significantly different with regard to their applied cognitive concepts-categorization methods based on defining features, prototypes (characteristic features) and theory-based view of meanings compared to their blind peers. These results highlight the fact that sighted students pointed to the main and the most distinctive features of categories. Features mentioned by the sighted group hada higher cue validity compared to that of the blind group. Moreover, results from the qualitative analysis declared that features mentioned by the sighted groups were of a more diverse type as compared to those by of blind groups. Students of the sighted group considered the main and most distinctive features of categories as well as their subsidiary features.
Conclusion: the type of diverse replies from the sighted group demonstrated that while the blind and semi-blind group students predominantly used astereotyped speech, their sighted peers were more aware of the features of different categories. It seems that their knowledge of different categories is based on what they learned from their school lessons or what they perceived by other perceptual systems. Above findings may be also attributed to determinant factors such as limited cognitive map data, weakness in recalling more than one pattern at a time, and the lack of direct experience.
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2013/08/16 | Accepted: 2013/10/23 | Published: 2013/12/22
Received: 2013/08/16 | Accepted: 2013/10/23 | Published: 2013/12/22
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |