Inconsistency with Prior Knowledge Triggers Children's Causal Explanatory Reasoning

Overview

Journal Child Dev

Specialty Pediatrics

Date 2010 Jun 25

PMID 20573114

Citations 31

Authors

Cristine H Legare

Susan A Gelman

Henry M Wellman

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

What events trigger causal explanatory reasoning in young children? Children's explanations could be triggered by either consistent events (suggesting that explanations serve a confirmatory function) or inconsistent events (suggesting that they promote discovery of new information). In 2 studies with preschool children (N = 80), events that were consistent with children's prior knowledge were simultaneously contrasted with events that were inconsistent with prior knowledge, and children were invited to explain either outcome (or both). Results demonstrate that inconsistent outcomes are an especially powerful trigger for children's explanations and that the explanations children provide for inconsistent outcomes refer to internal causal properties, overriding perceptual appearances. In sum, the data provide empirical evidence that inconsistent events motivate children to construct explanations, thereby suggesting that children's explanations function in the service of discovery.

Citing Articles

When children can explain why they believe a claim, they suggest a better empirical test for that claim.

Hermansen T, Mathisen K, Ronfard S R Soc Open Sci. 2024; 11(12):241875.

PMID: 39677540 PMC: 11641430. DOI: 10.1098/rsos.241875.

An Insight into developmental changes in reasoning skills among Indian Preschoolers: A cross-sectional study using a story-based approach.

Prasanna A, Bajaj G, Anakkathil Anil M, Bhat J F1000Res. 2024; 12:446.

PMID: 39584014 PMC: 11582391. DOI: 10.12688/f1000research.131906.3.

The Development of Cumulative Cultural Learning.

Legare C Annu Rev Dev Psychol. 2024; 1:119-147.

PMID: 38250669 PMC: 10798662. DOI: 10.1146/annurev-devpsych-121318-084848.

Free viewing biases for complex scenes in preschoolers and adults.

Linka M, Sensoy O, Karimpur H, Schwarzer G, de Haas B Sci Rep. 2023; 13(1):11803.

PMID: 37479760 PMC: 10362043. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-38854-8.

"It kinda has like a mind": Children's and parents' beliefs concerning viral disease transmission for COVID-19 and the common cold.

Labotka D, Gelman S Cognition. 2023; 235:105413.

PMID: 36842249 PMC: 9941317. DOI: 10.1016/j.cognition.2023.105413.

References

Kuhn D . Children and adults as intuitive scientists. Psychol Rev. 1989; 96(4):674-89. DOI: 10.1037/0033-295x.96.4.674. View

Kushnir T, Gopnik A . Young children infer causal strength from probabilities and interventions. Psychol Sci. 2005; 16(9):678-83. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-9280.2005.01595.x. View

Lombrozo T . The structure and function of explanations. Trends Cogn Sci. 2006; 10(10):464-70. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2006.08.004. View

Legare C, Wellman H, Gelman S . Evidence for an explanation advantage in naïve biological reasoning. Cogn Psychol. 2008; 58(2):177-94. PMC: 3718251. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2008.06.002. View

Gelman S, Markman E . Young children's inductions from natural kinds: the role of categories and appearances. Child Dev. 1987; 58(6):1532-41. View

Schulz L, Gopnik A . Causal learning across domains. Dev Psychol. 2004; 40(2):162-76. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.40.2.162. View

Keil F . Explanation and understanding. Annu Rev Psychol. 2005; 57:227-54. PMC: 3034737. DOI: 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190100. View

Graham S, Kilbreath C, Welder A . Thirteen-month-olds rely on shared labels and shape similarity for inductive inferences. Child Dev. 2004; 75(2):409-27. DOI: 10.1111/j.1467-8624.2004.00683.x. View

Siegler R . How does change occur: a microgenetic study of number conservation. Cogn Psychol. 1995; 28(3):225-73. DOI: 10.1006/cogp.1995.1006. View

10.

Gopnik A, Sobel D . Detecting blickets: how young children use information about novel causal powers in categorization and induction. Child Dev. 2000; 71(5):1205-22. DOI: 10.1111/1467-8624.00224. View

11.

Sakamoto Y, Love B . Schematic influences on category learning and recognition memory. J Exp Psychol Gen. 2004; 133(4):534-53. DOI: 10.1037/0096-3445.133.4.534. View

12.

Landis J, Koch G . The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977; 33(1):159-74. View

13.

Sloman S . When explanations compete: the role of explanatory coherence on judgements of likelihood. Cognition. 1994; 52(1):1-21. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(94)90002-7. View

14.

Mills C, Keil F . Knowing the limits of one's understanding: the development of an awareness of an illusion of explanatory depth. J Exp Child Psychol. 2003; 87(1):1-32. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2003.09.003. View

15.

Gopnik A, Sobel D, Schulz L, Glymour C . Causal learning mechanisms in very young children: two-, three-, and four-year-olds infer causal relations from patterns of variation and covariation. Dev Psychol. 2001; 37(5):620-9. View

16.

Kushnir T, Gopnik A . Conditional probability versus spatial contiguity in causal learning: Preschoolers use new contingency evidence to overcome prior spatial assumptions. Dev Psychol. 2007; 43(1):186-96. DOI: 10.1037/0012-1649.43.1.186. View

17.

Baldwin D, Markman E, Melartin R . Infants' ability to draw inferences about nonobvious object properties: evidence from exploratory play. Child Dev. 1993; 64(3):711-28. View

18.

Rojahn K, Pettigrew T . Memory for schema-relevant information: a meta-analytic resolution. Br J Soc Psychol. 1992; 31 ( Pt 2):81-109. DOI: 10.1111/j.2044-8309.1992.tb00958.x. View

19.

Gelman S, Markman E . Categories and induction in young children. Cognition. 1986; 23(3):183-209. DOI: 10.1016/0010-0277(86)90034-x. View

20.

Medin D, Coley J, Storms G, Hayes B . A relevance theory of induction. Psychon Bull Rev. 2003; 10(3):517-32. DOI: 10.3758/bf03196515. View