Do words shape who can do what? How subtle linguistic cues can influence children's categorization and ability...

A central question in children's social and cognitive development is how they represent people as belonging to one or more domains of activity and how they judge those individuals' capabilities within those domains. The present research examines whether category-focused language (e.g., "scientist"), which marks domain membership as a bounded identity, versus action-focused language (e.g., "someone who does science"), which frames participation as non-exclusive, influences children's and adults' categorization, cross-classification, and ability judgments of others and themselves across science, arts, and sports. In Study 1, children and adults categorized and judged others' abilities. In Study 2, children and adults did so for themselves. Study 1 showed that language had minimal impact on categorization and ability judgments about others; age group was the primary factor. Study 2 revealed that language was related to self-relevant categorization and ability judgments, with effects differing across children and adults and across the type of response. Category-focused language was associated with children more likely to classify themselves into a single domain and adults more likely to endorse cross-classification. Action-focused language was associated with children's lower ability judgments within a single domain but more positive ability judgments across two domains. These findings show subtle linguistic cues can shape beliefs about category membership and ability, particularly in self-relevant contexts, and underscore the need to examine categorization and ability judgments across domains.