Parameter setting and statistical learning

Three main models of parameter setting have been proposed: the Variational model proposed by Yang (2002; 2004), the Structured Acquisition model endorsed by Baker (2001; 2005), and the Very Early Parameter Setting (VEPS) model advanced by Wexler (1998). The VEPS model contends that parameters are set early. The Variational model supposes that children employ statistical learning mechanisms to decide among competing parameter values, so this model anticipates delays in parameter setting when critical input is sparse, and gradual setting of parameters. On the Structured Acquisition model, delays occur because parameters form a hierarchy, with higher-level parameters set before lower-level parameters. Assuming that children freely choose the initial value, children sometimes will miss-set parameters. However when that happens, the input is expected to trigger a precipitous rise in one parameter value and a corresponding decline in the other value. We will point to the kind of child language data that is needed in order to adjudicate among these competing models

Emergence of do-support in child English

14 page(s

Two Negations for the Price of One

Standard English is typically described as a double negation language. In double negation ­languages, each negative marker contributes independent semantic force. Two negations in the same clause usually cancel each other out, resulting in an affirmative sentence. Other dialects of English permit negative concord. In negative concord sentences, the two negative markers yield a single semantic negation. This paper explores how English-speaking children interpret sentences with more than one negative element, in order to assess whether their early grammar allows negative concord. According to Zeijlstra’s (2004) typological generalization, if a language has a negative syntactic head, it will be a negative concord language. Since Standard English is often analysed as having a negative head, it represents an apparent exception to Zeijlstra’s ­generalization. This raises the intriguing possibility that initially, children recognize that English has a negative head (i.e., 'n’t') and, therefore, assign negative concord interpretations to sentences with two negations, despite the absence of evidence for this interpretation in the adult input. The present study investigated this possibility in a comprehension study with 20 3- to 5-year-old ­children and a control group of 15 adults. The test sentences were presented in contexts that made them amenable to either a double negation or a negative concord interpretation. As expected, the adult participants assigned the double negation interpretation of the test sentences the majority of the time. In contrast, the child participants assigned the alternative, negative concord interpretation the majority of the time. Children must jettison the negative concord interpretation of sentences with two negative markers, and acquire a double negation interpretation. We propose that the requisite positive evidence is the appearance of negative expressions like 'nothing 'in object position. Because such expressions exert semantic force without a second negation, this informs children that they are acquiring a double negation language

The acquisition of questions with long-distance dependencies

A number of researchers have claimed that questions and other constructions with long distance dependencies (LDDs) are acquired relatively early, by age 4 or even earlier, in spite of their complexity. Analysis of LDD questions in the input available to children suggests that they are extremely stereotypical, raising the possibility that children learn lexically specific templates such as WH do you think S-GAP? rather than general rules of the kind postulated in traditional linguistic accounts of this construction. We describe three elicited imitation experiments with children aged from 4;6 to 6;9 and adult controls. Participants were asked to repeat prototypical questions (i.e., questions which match the hypothesised template), unprototypical questions (which depart from it in several respects) and declarative counterparts of both types of interrogative sentences. The children performed significantly better on the prototypical variants of both constructions, even when both variants contained exactly the same lexical material, while adults showed prototypicality e¤ects for LDD questions only. These results suggest that a general declarative complementation construction emerges quite late in development (after age 6), and that even adults rely on lexically specific templates for LDD questions

How does social context influence appraisal and help-seeking for potential cancer symptoms in adults aged 50 and over? A qualitative interview study

Objective: To investigate how social context and social network activation influence appraisal and help-seeking for symptoms potentially indicative of cancer. Methods: Semi-structured telephone interview study. Community dwelling adults who had experienced at least one symptom potentially indicative of cancer within the last month were sampled from a national symptom survey. Results: Thirty-four interviews were conducted. Participants looked to peers and wider society to judge whether symptoms might be normal for their age. Involvement of others in symptom appraisal promoted an active management strategy, such as contacting a healthcare professional or trying a medication. There were practical, emotional, attitudinal, normative and moral barriers to involving others. Cancer narratives from significant others, public health campaigns and the media influenced symptom appraisal. Participants held mental representations of types of people who get cancer, for example, smokers and unfit people. This had two consequences. First, participants did not identify themselves as a candidate for cancer; impeding help-seeking. Second, social judgements about lifestyle introduced stigma. Conclusion: Involving friends/family in symptom appraisal facilitates help-seeking but barriers exist to involving others. Campaigns to promote earlier cancer diagnosis should incorporate age-appropriate narratives, address misconceptions about ‘types’ of people who get cancer and tackle stigma about lifestyle factors.</p

Evaluation of expressive writing for postpartum health: A randomized controlled trial

Pregnancy, birth and adjusting to a new baby is a potentially stressful time that can negatively affect the health of women. There is some evidence that expressive writing can have positive effects on psychological and physical health, particularly during stressful periods. The current study aimed to evaluate whether expressive writing would improve women’s postpartum health. A randomized controlled trial was conducted with three conditions: expressive writing (n=188), a control writing task (n=213), or normal care (n=163). Measures of psychological health, physical health and quality of life were measured at baseline (6-12 weeks postpartum), 1 month and 6 months later. Ratings of stress were taken before and after the expressive writing task. Intent-to-treat analyses showed no significant differences between women in the expressive writing, control writing and normal care groups on measures of physical health, anxiety, depression, mood or quality of life at 1 and 6 months. Uptake and adherence to the writing tasks was low. However, women in the expressive writing group rated their stress as significantly reduced after completing the task. Cost analysis suggest women who did expressive writing had the lowest costs in terms of healthcare service use and lowest cost per unit of improvement in quality of life. Results suggest expressive writing is not effective as a universal intervention for all women 6-12 weeks postpartum. Future research should examine expressive writing as a targeted intervention for women in high-risk groups, such as those with mild or moderate depression, and further examine cost-effectiveness

Feasibility and acceptability of expressive writing with postpartum women: a randomised controlled trial

Abstract Background: Pregnancy, birth and adjusting to a new baby is a potentially stressful time that can negatively affect women’s mental and physical health. Expressive writing, where people write about a stressful event for at least 15 minutes on three consecutive days, has been associated with improved health in some groups but it is not clear whether it is feasible and acceptable for use with postpartum women. This study therefore examined the feasibility and acceptability of expressive writing for postpartum women as part of a randomised controlled trial (RCT). Methods: The Health After Birth Trial (HABiT) was an RCT evaluating expressive writing for postpartum women which included measures of feasibility and acceptability. At 6 to 12 weeks after birth 854 women were randomised to expressive writing, a control writing task or normal care, and outcome measures of health were measured at baseline, one month later and six months later. Feasibility was measured by recruitment, attrition, and adherence to the intervention. Quantitative and qualitative measures of acceptability of the materials and the task were completed six months after the intervention. Results: Recruitment was low (10.7% of those invited to participate) and the recruited sample was from a restricted sociodemographic range. Attrition was high, increased as the study progressed (35.8% at baseline, 57.5% at one month, and 68.1% at six months) and was higher in the writing groups than in the normal care group. Women complied with instructions to write expressively or not, but adherence to the instruction to write for 15 minutes per day for three days was low (Expressive writing: 29.3%; Control writing: 23.5%). Acceptability measures showed that women who wrote expressively rated the materials/task both more positively and more negatively than those in the control writing group, and qualitative comments revealed that women enjoyed the writing and/or found it helpful even when it was upsetting. Conclusions: The feasibility of offering expressive writing as a universal self-help intervention to all postpartum women 6 to 12 weeks after birth in the HABiT trial was low, but the expressive writing intervention was acceptable to the majority of women who completed it