Collaborative Research: Generics in context: Examining mental biases and resources in social and science communication and learning

Lack of diversity in STEM fields (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) stifles scientific, technological and social progress. This project tackles this issue from two angles. First, it generates new empirical findings on cognitive and linguistic barriers that stand in the way of eliminating achievement disparities, and second, it builds a collaborative interdisciplinary mentoring program benefitting undergraduate and graduate students at two Minority-Serving Institutions. Using an interdisciplinary approach, the project investigates ways to harness the mental and linguistic resources available to children and adults to facilitate science learning and effective science communication, scaffold deeper understanding of social inequities in the context of larger social structures (“structural thinking”), and foster the capacity to envision social change. Specifically, this project examines the developmental trajectory of how people learn, represent and communicate about generalizable regularities in the social, biological and physical world. Bridging methodology and theory from several Cognitive Science disciplines (psychology, philosophy and linguistics), five large-scale studies explore how generalization and generic language across development can (i) be affected by the stability of a regularity across times, places, and other circumstances, (ii) be flexible and restricted to a context (e.g., the US today), and (iii) affect (mis)communication in education and across political divides. Overall, the project elucidates several fundamental cognitive and communicative barriers to diversifying STEM and identifies psychologically feasible ways to counteract them, while offering advanced mentoring and intensive training in cutting-edge research methods to a diverse and inclusive group of students. This award reflects NSF's statutory mission and has been deemed worthy of support through evaluation using the Foundation's intellectual merit and broader impacts review criteria.