• PhilPapers
  • PhilPeople
  • PhilArchive
  • PhilEvents
  • PhilJobs
  • Sign in
PhilPeople
 
  • Sign in
  • News Feed
  • Find Philosophers
  • Departments
  • Radar
  • Help
 
profile-cover
Drag to reposition
profile picture

Melissa M. Kibbe

Boston University
  •  Home
  •  Publications
    12
    • Most Recent
    • Most Downloaded
    • Topics
  •  News and Updates
    7

 More details
  • Boston University
    Associate Professor
Rutgers - New Brunswick
PhD
Homepage
0000-0002-9088-2523
Areas of Specialization
Psychology
Cognitive Sciences, Misc
Areas of Interest
Psychology
Cognitive Sciences, Misc
  • All publications (12)
  •  209
    Three- and four-year-old children represent mutually exclusive possible identities.
    with Esra Nur Turan-Küçük
    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 249. 2025.
  •  150
    Three- and four-year-old children represent mutually exclusive possible identities.
    with Esra Nur Turan-Küçük
    Journal of Experimental Child Psychology 249. 2025.
  •  250
    What kinds of computations can young children perform over non-symbolic representations of small quantities?
    with Chen Cheng
    Open Mind 9. 2025.
  •  65
    The ubiquity of episodic-like memory in human infants
    with L. Behm and N. Turk-Browne
    Trends in Cognitive Sciences 29. 2025.
    Cognitive Sciences
  •  240
    Children's reasoning about possible outcomes of events in the present and the future.
    with Esra Nur Turan-Küçük
    Developmental Psychology. 2025.
  •  70
    Three-year-olds' ability to plan for mutually exclusive future possibilities is limited primarily by their representations of possible plans, not possible events
    with Esra Nur Turan-Küçük
    Cognition 244 (C): 105712. 2024.
    Cognitive Sciences
  •  44
    The language-of-thought as a working hypothesis for developmental cognitive science
    Behavioral and Brain Sciences 46. 2023.
    A science of prelinguistic infant cognition must take seriously the language-of-thought (LoT) hypothesis. I show how the LoT framework enables us to identify the representational and computational capacities of infant minds and the developmental factors that act on these capacities, and explain how Quilty-Dunn et al.'s take on LoT has important upshots for developmental theory-building.
    Cognitive Sciences
  •  91
    Is Nonsymbolic Arithmetic Truly “Arithmetic”? Examining the Computational Capacity of the Approximate Number System in Young Children
    with Chen Cheng
    Cognitive Science 47 (6). 2023.
    Young children with limited knowledge of formal mathematics can intuitively perform basic arithmetic‐like operations over nonsymbolic, approximate representations of quantity. However, the algorithmic rules that guide such nonsymbolic operations are not entirely clear. We asked whether nonsymbolic arithmetic operations have a function‐like structure, like symbolic arithmetic. Children (n = 74 4‐ to ‐8‐year‐olds in Experiment 1; n = 52 7‐ to 8‐year‐olds in Experiment 2) first solved two nonsymbol…Read more
    Young children with limited knowledge of formal mathematics can intuitively perform basic arithmetic‐like operations over nonsymbolic, approximate representations of quantity. However, the algorithmic rules that guide such nonsymbolic operations are not entirely clear. We asked whether nonsymbolic arithmetic operations have a function‐like structure, like symbolic arithmetic. Children (n = 74 4‐ to ‐8‐year‐olds in Experiment 1; n = 52 7‐ to 8‐year‐olds in Experiment 2) first solved two nonsymbolic arithmetic problems. We then showed children two unequal sets of objects, and asked children which of the two derived solutions should be added to the smaller of the two sets to make them “about the same.” We hypothesized that, if nonsymbolic arithmetic follows similar function rules to symbolic arithmetic, then children should be able to use the solutions of nonsymbolic computations as inputs into another nonsymbolic problem. Contrary to this hypothesis, we found that children were unable to reliably do so, suggesting that these solutions may not operate as independent representations that can be used inputs into other nonsymbolic computations. These results suggest that nonsymbolic and symbolic arithmetic computations are algorithmically distinct, which may limit the extent to which children can leverage nonsymbolic arithmetic intuitions to acquire formal mathematics knowledge.
    Cognitive Sciences
  •  46
    Children's understanding of economic demand: A dissociation between inference and choice
    with Alexis S. Smith-Flores, Jessica B. Applin, and Peter R. Blake
    Cognition 214 (C): 104747. 2021.
    Cognitive Sciences
  •  47
    A dissociation between small and large numbers in young children’s ability to “solve for x” in non-symbolic math problems
    with Lisa Feigenson
    Cognition 160 (C): 82-90. 2017.
  •  62
    Infants use temporal regularities to chunk objects in memory
    with Lisa Feigenson
    Cognition 146 (C): 251-263. 2016.
  •  2262
    Problems and mysteries of the many languages of thought
    with Eric Mandelbaum, Yarrow Dunham, Roman Feiman, Chaz Firestone, E. J. Green, Daniel Harris, Benedek Kurdi, Myrto Mylopoulos, Joshua Shepherd, Alexis Wellwood, Nicolas Porot, and Jake Quilty-Dunn
    Cognitive Science 46 (12). 2022.
    “What is the structure of thought?” is as central a question as any in cognitive science. A classic answer to this question has appealed to a Language of Thought (LoT). We point to emerging research from disparate branches of the field that supports the LoT hypothesis, but also uncovers diversity in LoTs across cognitive systems, stages of development, and species. Our letter formulates open research questions for cognitive science concerning the varieties of rules and representations that under…Read more
    “What is the structure of thought?” is as central a question as any in cognitive science. A classic answer to this question has appealed to a Language of Thought (LoT). We point to emerging research from disparate branches of the field that supports the LoT hypothesis, but also uncovers diversity in LoTs across cognitive systems, stages of development, and species. Our letter formulates open research questions for cognitive science concerning the varieties of rules and representations that underwrite various LoT-based systems and how these variations can help researchers taxonomize cognitive systems
    Philosophy of MindPhilosophy of Cognitive Science
PhilPeople logo

On this site

  • Find a philosopher
  • Find a department
  • The Radar
  • Index of professional philosophers
  • Index of departments
  • Help
  • Acknowledgments
  • Careers
  • Contact us
  • Terms and conditions

Brought to you by

  • The PhilPapers Foundation
  • The American Philosophical Association
  • Centre for Digital Philosophy, Western University
PhilPeople is currently in Beta Sponsored by the PhilPapers Foundation and the American Philosophical Association
Feedback