Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access JSTOR through your library or other institution:

login

Log in through your institution.

Are Linguists Better Subjects?

Jennifer Culbertson and Steven Gross
The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science
Vol. 60, No. 4 (Dec., 2009), pp. 721-736
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/25592032
Page Count: 16
  • Download ($42.00)
  • Cite this Item
Are Linguists Better Subjects?
Preview not available

Abstract

Who are the best subjects for judgment tasks intended to test grammatical hypotheses? Michael Devitt ([2006a], [2006b]) argues, on the basis of a hypothesis concerning the psychology of such judgments, that linguists themselves are. We present empirical evidence suggesting that the relevant divide is not between linguists and non-linguists, but between subjects with and without minimally sufficient task-specific knowledge. In particular, we show that subjects with at least some minimal exposure to or knowledge of such tasks tend to perform consistently with one another-greater knowledge of linguistics makes no further difference-while at the same time exhibiting markedly greater in-group consistency than those who have no previous exposure to or knowledge of such tasks and their goals.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
[721]
    [721]
  • Thumbnail: Page 
722
    722
  • Thumbnail: Page 
723
    723
  • Thumbnail: Page 
724
    724
  • Thumbnail: Page 
725
    725
  • Thumbnail: Page 
726
    726
  • Thumbnail: Page 
727
    727
  • Thumbnail: Page 
728
    728
  • Thumbnail: Page 
729
    729
  • Thumbnail: Page 
730
    730
  • Thumbnail: Page 
731
    731
  • Thumbnail: Page 
732
    732
  • Thumbnail: Page 
733
    733
  • Thumbnail: Page 
734
    734
  • Thumbnail: Page 
735
    735
  • Thumbnail: Page 
736
    736