» Articles » PMID: 26926281

The Effects of Environment and Ownership on Children's Innovation of Tools and Tool Material Selection

Overview
Specialty Biology
Date 2016 Mar 2
PMID 26926281
Citations 5
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Research indicates that in experimental settings, young children of 3-7 years old are unlikely to devise a simple tool to solve a problem. This series of exploratory studies done in museums in the US and UK explores how environment and ownership of materials may improve children's ability and inclination for (i) tool material selection and (ii) innovation. The first study takes place in a children's museum, an environment where children can use tools and materials freely. We replicated a tool innovation task in this environment and found that while 3-4 year olds showed the predicted low levels of innovation rates, 4-7 year olds showed higher rates of innovation than the younger children and than reported in prior studies. The second study explores the effect of whether the experimental materials are owned by the experimenter or the child on tool selection and innovation. Results showed that 5-6 year olds and 6-7 year olds were more likely to select tool material they owned compared to tool material owned by the experimenter, although ownership had no effect on tool innovation. We argue that learning environments supporting tool exploration and invention and conveying ownership over materials may encourage successful tool innovation at earlier ages.

Citing Articles

Children's limited tooling ability in a novel concurrent tool use task supports the innovation gap.

Colbourne J, Auersperg A, Beck S Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):21374.

PMID: 39266618 PMC: 11393408. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-71686-8.


Where innovations flourish: an ethnographic and archaeological overview of hunter-gatherer learning contexts.

Lew-Levy S, Milks A, Lavi N, Pope S, Friesem D Evol Hum Sci. 2023; 2:e31.

PMID: 37588392 PMC: 10427478. DOI: 10.1017/ehs.2020.35.


Young children fail to generate an additive ratchet effect in an open-ended construction task.

Reindl E, Tennie C PLoS One. 2018; 13(6):e0197828.

PMID: 29912882 PMC: 6005566. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0197828.


Adaptable individuals and innovative lineages.

Sterelny K Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016; 371(1690).

PMID: 26926286 PMC: 4780538. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0196.


Animal and human innovation: novel problems and novel solutions.

Reader S, Morand-Ferron J, Flynn E Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2016; 371(1690).

PMID: 26926273 PMC: 4780525. DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2015.0182.

References
1.
McGuigan N, Whiten A . Emulation and "overemulation" in the social learning of causally opaque versus causally transparent tool use by 23- and 30-month-olds. J Exp Child Psychol. 2009; 104(4):367-81. DOI: 10.1016/j.jecp.2009.07.001. View

2.
Csibra G, Gergely G . Natural pedagogy. Trends Cogn Sci. 2009; 13(4):148-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.tics.2009.01.005. View

3.
Davidson M, Amso D, Anderson L, Diamond A . Development of cognitive control and executive functions from 4 to 13 years: evidence from manipulations of memory, inhibition, and task switching. Neuropsychologia. 2006; 44(11):2037-78. PMC: 1513793. DOI: 10.1016/j.neuropsychologia.2006.02.006. View

4.
Willatts P . Development of means-end behavior in young infants: pulling a support to retrieve a distant object. Dev Psychol. 1999; 35(3):651-67. DOI: 10.1037//0012-1649.35.3.651. View

5.
Over H, Carpenter M . Putting the social into social learning: explaining both selectivity and fidelity in children's copying behavior. J Comp Psychol. 2011; 126(2):182-92. DOI: 10.1037/a0024555. View