Category Norms: Generation Frequency - Lab Report Example

Category Norms: Generation Frequency Affiliation: In a survey conducted online through the survey website, Surveygizmo, 143 participants took part to determine their ranking of two independent variables, birds and sports. Data was collected and presented in a MS Excel file from which raw data was processed to show case trends on how individuals ranked several of these items. Several is used in this case to show that the entire data collected could not be presented in one report due to its scope and extend. In the survey, all data was collected and presented in an excel file. However, data analysis only considered the first 20 items in both surveys. Results were compared with similar surveys that had been conducted to determine the category norms of data and how respondents ranked the items. The results in this case show that participants had an average age of 39 with a standard deviation of 14.73554, while 78 of the 143 participants were female and the rest males except of one case that did not identify its sex. From the results, it was concluded that participants were able to relate items and categories with regards to their recollection of the most familiar items under every category. INTRODUCTION With reference to various studies that have conducted surveys on linguistic cultural norms and their relations to generation frequency, typicality, familiarity, and imageability, this report reflects on the specific variables that influence category norms. Following the hypothesis that age affects familiarity and imageability while typicality generates abstract responses under category norms and generation frequency, this reports considers surveys such as Battig and Montague’s (1969). Battig and Montague conducted a survey to determine cross-cultural and linguistics associations with generation frequency. Cross cultural and linguistic studies show that most of the variances are related to cultural differences. Howard (1979) undertook a survey in which he wanted to test category norms for adults of ages 20 to 80. In his study, Howard undertook a survey from which he wanted to determine if age norms gathered from college going students held the grounds for proper research with different group of adults. In order to perform this research, Howard considered to the inclusion of 25 men and 25 women to complete. The participants were asked to produce as many category members as they could regarding the 21 categories provided. The age cohorts that were involved in this survey included 20-39 for young, 40-59 for middle, and 60-79 for old. Tables were arranged four columns and 21 rows to indicate dependent and independent variables respectively. The independent variables are the member categories, the 21. The dependent variables are the frequency of each response, times it was listed first, and the average rank. The survey was compared with Battig and Montague (1969) groups and reported the difference. On a similar research, Howard (1980) considered his previous study of 1979 and Battig & Montague’s (1969) study to further analysis of the data and comparisons between the two surveys. In the second survey, Howard considers the relationship between responses of adults of ages 20 to 80 as he did with the first survey. However, this time he draws conclusions that the old aged groups were in a rather difficulty position to produce as much responses as the young and middle aged groups were able to produce. Analysis shows that old people produced fewer responses and had difficulties of producing idiosyncratic and unique responses. Price and Connolly (2006) conducted a survey that involved children’s category norms for some 33 categories. The sample size was 448 children of ages 3-12. Response/examples for this study were generated for the 33 categories. The survey had data classified into three major columns which included response/examples that were reported first, response/examples reported across the ages of 3-5, 6-8, and 9-12 years, the mean ranks for each were presented as well. With reference to the three categories of age groups, the responses were collected and complied independently for each age group. In this case, the researchers did not mind whether the response/examples were of the respective category they were assigned to by the children. The aim of the study was to identify if children were able to identify similarities across objects. This shows that the children who were unable to classify the items in their respective categories confirmed the some of the students, especially of ages 3-5 had difficulties relating objects. Under the response/example of jobs, 510 responses were reported to have been different thus promoting the cut off at the 20th response/example as the number of responses for each category would have made the results’ tables painfully long. Due to lack of systematic databases for varying semantics of the Russian Languages, Kokinov, Karmiloff-Smith, and Nerssesian (2011) carried out a survey that involved three hundred and thirty six respondents. The survey involved the generation of response/examples of 45 semantics categories of the Russian Language. Each response/example had its frequency recorded, the average mean, and the number of times each response/example was reported first. Each of the 23 categories had 50 subjects evaluated for typicality, familiarity, and imageability. The database was considered reliable for researchers studying categorisation and shows that the lack of controlled inferences may be invalid. Marshall & Parr (1996) carried out a survey similar to Howard’s (1979, 1980), and Battig & Montague’s (1969). The aim of the study was to study the category norms of New Zealand’s university students following a similar survey set up to identify how people classified different words. The validity of category norms was the main concern of Marshall’s study as he included some329 adult university students. The mean average age was 25 years if age while 10 categories were identified. The survey included the number of times each response was given for every category, the number of instances each response was given first under each category, and the mean rank of the responses. Based on verbal behaviour, Marshall and Parr’s (1996) survey was concerned with a New Zealand sample that they used to confirm the merit of having access to category norms. METHOD The survey for the current study was conducted online through surveygizmo, an online survey website. Students taking part in this study selected five participants each and had them log into the survey website from which each student collected the responses and presented to the lecturer for publishing on the course forum. In total, about 142 participants took part in the overall survey. In this case, respondents were assigned the task to log in to the website, access the survey questions which included the categorization of different birds and sports into various categories. Raw data was collected from the survey website and then imported to Excel templates. Data in this case is presented in three major columns that include frequency, average rank, and the mean. Frequency shows how many times each item was referred to in the responses, while the average rank shows how the item would be classified given the number of responses and the position that each response appeared. In this case, 20 categories were identified with 20 items considered as well. The mean on the other hand, shows the average number of responses against the total number of categories. The current research did not use any assumptions as it was a primary research. One hundred and forty two participants were considered for this survey from which 78 females and 63 men were incorporated for the survey – one case was not classified as either male or female but the responses were included in the final presentation. The average age for the respondents was 39 with a standard deviation of 14.7553. Respondents were asked to take the online from which on 30-seconds were allowed for every category they were required to fill. After 30 seconds, participants were instructed to stop and move on to the next category. After completion of the survey, each respondent would conclude the survey thus saving the output data for collective analysis after every one was done. Prior to submission of results, the respondents were asked question on their gender and age. In this case, the researchers required to test how adults were able to relate various items with categories. The current research compares with Battig and Montague (1969) who set the primary research for categorisation using category norms. On the flaws and limitations, the time allowed for the sample to complete the survey was initially communicated to the respondents to be five minutes from which 30 seconds were allowed for every category. However, provided that the surveys were not conducted in the same room, it cannot be established whether all other members of the class adhered to the 30 second-time frame. One limitation of the survey is the lack of enough time to incorporate more respondents. It is also doubtful whether all the students involved in this study were able to find five participants each and if the ones they found were willing to take the online survey or answer the question of age. Some of the survey results may be mere guesswork by students who failed to allocate find participants. As an online survey, more participants would have been accommodated in this case. It is worth noting that the data was presented for the first 20 categories with from which the first 20 items were randomly selected and their average ranks formulated considering the specific frequencies under each category. Thus, categories did not influence the selection of the data items as these were the dependent variables. RESULTS Table 2: Sports’ Average Rank, Frequency, and Mean Sport Frequency Average Rank Mean 4x4 driving 1 6.0 0.05 Aerobics 1 6.0 0.05 AFL/Gridiron 6 6.0 0.3 Archery 4 10.3 0.2 Athlectics 7 5.9 0.35 Aussie Rules Football 1 10.0 0.05 Badminton 25 6.5 1.25 Ballet 1 7.0 0.05 Baseball 29 6.3 1.45 Basketball 52 5.5 2.6 BMX 2 3.0 0.1 Bobsledding 1 1.0 0.05 Bowls 7 5.7 0.35 Boxing 7 8.0 0.35 Camping 5 5.0 0.25 Canoeing/Kayaking 2 5.0 0.1 Chess 2 7.5 0.1 Croquet 2 7.5 0.1 Curling 5 10.4 0.25 Cycling 11 6.4 0.55 Table 3 Participants’ Data Summary Variable Output Females 78 Males 63 Others/Not specified 1 Average Age 39 Age Standard Deviation 14.75583 Data from table 1 above shows that the total number of participants who took part in the birds’ survey where five less the total who were supposedly supposed to complete the survey. However, this lack of completion of the exercise did not affect the study at all as the results from an incomplete survey were not included in the final data set for analysis. Using a benchmark of 5 responses for every category and the number of items mentioned for that specific category, it is shown that bird of paradise, the crow, parakeet, flamingo, and galah were less mentioned in the responses provided as compared to other birds. On the other hand, using a cutoff of 15, the highly cited birds include the hawk, budgie, pigeon, eagle, and blackbird. Data from table 2 above shows that the total number of participants who took part in the sports’ survey where fully participative in the survey. Therefore, the survey was undertaken to completion following the survey guidelines that only completed survey was legible for inclusion in the data analysis and presentation. Using a benchmark of 5 responses for every category and the number of items mentioned for that specific category, it is shown that 4x4 driving, aerobics, archery, aussie rules football, ballet, bobsledding, canoeing, chess, and croquet were less mentioned in the responses provided as compared to other sports. On the other hand, using a cutoff of 15, the highly cited sports include the basketball, badminton, and baseball. DISCUSSION When relating to other surveys such as Battig and Montague (1969) and Howard (1979 & 1980), the current survey shows that the category norms are functions of age, imageability, familiarity, and typicality. The trends show that adults are more likely to recall abstract elements of items they have an idea of but are more precise on characteristics of what they have an experience with. However, based on the ages Battig and Montague (1969), Howard (1979), Howard (1980) studies show that participants of elderly ages produced less unique responses as compared to those of a younger age. On the current study, regardless of their uniqueness, participants of younger ages were able to produce more responses for each category as compared to the elderly ones. This shows that younger participants were able to relate to various categories and produce more responses under each category than the elderly. This confirms the conclusions made in other studies considered in this report. With reference to Price & Connolly (2006), participants in this case were adults but still portrayed the inability to place their responses in the right categories and therefore, numerous categories had data that was outside the scope of the current study. For instance, in both the sports’ and the birds’ surveys some participants included defining words rather than names of a sport or a bird. Confirming with the current research are the results by Kokinov, Karmiloff-Smith, & Nersessian (2011) that inferences relate to imageability, familiarity, and typicality. Thus for the younger participants, it was easier to generate more responses as they could create images of the items they perceived to belong to a certain category. On the other hand, the elderly participants were able to produce responses that reflected items they were familiar with. Results falling outside the scope of the study confirm typicality as the participants would have the idea but lack the correct reference to the item. References Battig, W.F., & Montague, W.E. (1969). Category norms for verbal items in 56 categories: A replication and extension of the Connecticut category norms. Journal of Experimental Psychology Monograph, 80, 1-46 Howard, D. (1979). “Studies of aging and semantic structure: category norms for adults between the ages of 20 and 80”. Technical report #1R23AG00713 (01). Washington D.C: National Institute on Aging, Department of Health and welfare. Howard, D. (1980). Category norms: A comparison of the Battig and Montague (1969) norms with the references of adults between age of 20 and 80. Journal of Gerontology #35(2): 225-231. Kokinov, B., Karmiloff-Smith, A., Nersessian, N. J. (2011). European Perspectives on Cognitive Science: Psycholinguistic Database for Russian Language. New Bulgarian University Press. Marshall, C.E. & Parr, W.V. (1996). New-Zealand Norms for a subset Of Battig and Montague (1969) Categories". New Zealand journal of psychology, 25(1): 24-29. Price, H., & Connolly, D. (2006). BatMon II: Children’s category norms for 33 categories, #38 (3): 529-531. Read More