Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Experiment Videos

Re-evaluating evidence for linguistic relativity: reply to Boroditsky (2001).

David January1, Edward Kako

  • 1University of Pennsylvania, USA. djanuary@sas.upenn.edu

Cognition
|August 18, 2006
PubMed
Summary

Replication attempts failed to support the idea that language shapes thought. The study found no evidence for the Whorfian hypothesis regarding linguistic relativity and conceptions of time.

Related Concept Videos

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Information sources for noun learning.

Cognitive science·2011
Same author

Co-localization of stroop and syntactic ambiguity resolution in Broca's area: implications for the neural basis of sentence processing.

Journal of cognitive neuroscience·2009
Same author

On the give and take between event apprehension and utterance formulation.

Journal of memory and language·2008
Same author

Thematic role properties of subjects and objects.

Cognition·2005

Area of Science:

  • Cognitive Psychology
  • Linguistics
  • Psycholinguistics

Background:

  • The linguistic relativity hypothesis, or Whorfian hypothesis, proposes that language influences thought.
  • Boroditsky (2001) reported findings suggesting differences in Mandarin and English speakers' conceptions of time, supporting linguistic relativity.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To empirically test the replicability of Boroditsky (2001)'s findings on language and time perception.
  • To examine the theoretical underpinnings of the original study and its support for the Whorfian hypothesis.

Main Methods:

  • Six independent replication attempts of Boroditsky (2001) were conducted.
  • Empirical data from replication attempts were analyzed.
  • Theoretical issues within the original report were critically reviewed.

Related Experiment Videos

Main Results:

  • All six replication attempts failed to reproduce the key finding from Boroditsky (2001).
  • Empirical inconsistencies were identified in the original study's findings.
  • Theoretical arguments in the original report were found to be insufficient.

Conclusions:

  • The reported replication failures suggest that Boroditsky (2001) does not provide empirical support for the Whorfian hypothesis.
  • The study concludes that current evidence does not support the claim that language shapes fundamental conceptions of time.
  • Further investigation into linguistic relativity requires more robust empirical evidence and theoretical grounding.