[HN Gopher] Preschool children rarely seek data when observation... ___________________________________________________________________ Preschool children rarely seek data when observation and testimony conflict Author : DocFeind Score : 56 points Date : 2021-07-10 19:29 UTC (3 hours ago) (HTM) web link (srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com) (TXT) w3m dump (srcd.onlinelibrary.wiley.com) | daenz wrote: | Unless I am missing it, they don't report the results by gender, | but they do by age. Is this suggesting that the results were | identical across gender? | chmod775 wrote: | > Is this suggesting that the results were identical across | gender? | | I suppose you mean sex, since using genders for preschoolers | would be ridiculous. | | Secondly no, it's not suggesting that. It's simply suggesting | they may not have grouped their results by sex, maybe because | that would have made the groups too small to yield useful data, | or because they simply weren't interested in that. | | As an aside, you shouldn't post-factum partition your data by | characteristics you did not set out to compare, because then | you might try height, intelligence, hair color, etc. until you | find some characteristic that yields differences of | "statistical significance" even though you've just been trying | them all until you found something that differentiated some | groups by random chance. | dtrain2017 wrote: | So, pre-school children are more likely to investigate a conflict | if the testimony is provided before the observation than if it is | provided after. Basically, if you want to avoid confirmation bias | you'll need to form your own opinion ahead of the event. | ALittleLight wrote: | I think they should have done this with an incentive. Basically, | don't ask "If I want to make the music box play, which figurine | should I use?" But tell the children before the sorting task that | if they make the music box play you'll give them a marshmallow. | Without an incentive the kids may just not care enough to | investigate. | yorwba wrote: | I think making the music box play is supposed to be rewarding | in itself. | Yajirobe wrote: | Better yet, threaten to punish them. It's been shown that | negative reinforcement is more effective than positive | [deleted] | ARandomerDude wrote: | It's wrong to threaten to punish a child just for the fun of | it, even if "fun" is cloaked in a scientific study. | ascar wrote: | Common mistake: Negative reinforcement is when you take a | negative stimulus away to reinforce the desired behavior. | | What you're describing is positive punishment. | | Also nicely explained in TBBT: https://youtu.be/gLp_aLMm5qQ | tpoacher wrote: | well it shouldn't. makes much more sense to use negative | reinforcement as a term to describe a reinforcing stimulus | of a negative nature. | | optimal terminology has never been our strong point as a | scientific community. | MeinBlutIstBlau wrote: | Could this have more to do with the fact that pre-school aged | children have the attention span of a puppy because their brains | aren't fully developed yet? | wizzwizz4 wrote: | Or perhaps because the intuitions of pre-school-aged children | are still forming; there's a lot they don't know, and the world | is new and exciting, so scepticism would mostly just rob them | of learning opportunities. | nicoburns wrote: | From what I remember of being that age, I think I just didn't | notice things. As an adult (and as an older child) I often | get a "that doesn't seem right" feeling/intuition. As a very | young child I didn't know what normal was or what the | important parts of experiences were so I was much more open | to things and just went with them. | starkd wrote: | I don't think pre-school aged children even know where to look | for the data yet. | wccrawford wrote: | I think they do: Ask their parents or teachers. | | But remembering it long enough to get away from the person | who told them the fact and then ask a different person... | That's another story. I'd think far too much would be | happening for them to bother remembering to ask. | | Being able to look it up independently of another human makes | it a lot easier to verify information immediately, so I'm not | surprised that people who can read are more likely to verify | info than those who can't. | ALittleLight wrote: | In this test the kids are sorting figures that do or don't | activate a music box. The box is left next to them so they | could use the box to test the figures prior to sorting them | or they could rely on what an experimenter told them (white | figures activate the box) or what they observed when a | different experimenter was actually using the toy. What the | title means by "seek data" is "Did the kids try the figurines | on the box themselves?" | jkepler wrote: | They also get a ton of data about the world through free | play, especially outside in nature, but they experience it as | play, not data gathering. | dylan604 wrote: | Yet, this describes plenty of older people as well (teens/20s). | WJW wrote: | I know this is a popular preconception and it feeds into all | our biases about lazy youth that just needs to get off our | lawn, but any teenager will readily out-think a preschooler. | [deleted] | cryptogeek123 wrote: | Great. Let's quickly indoctrinate them with CRT. | ElViajero wrote: | > Elementary school children significantly increased their | exploration of the dolls when their intuitions had been | contradicted as compared to when they had been confirmed, | frequently picking up the smallest and the biggest doll | concurrently to compare their relative weight--a direct test of | the claim they had been given. Preschool children rarely engaged | in this behavior, whether their intuitions had been confirmed or | contradicted. | | Interesting study. Good to make clear that this does not apply to | older children. Older children will verify any surprising claims. | On the other hand they suffer, like adults, of confirmation bias. | If the information fits their expectation they will not check is | veracity. I guess that confirmation bias is just an efficient way | of learning about the world, do not waste time if things seem to | fit your current understanding of the world. | jacinda wrote: | > I guess that confirmation bias is just an efficient way of | learning about the world, do not waste time if things seem to | fit your current understanding of the world. | | Interesting observation - in this light, confirmation bias | could almost be considered a variant of Occam's razor. | naniwaduni wrote: | Occam's razor is a variant of confirmation bias. | vmception wrote: | Check lists of other acknowledged biases, such as putting too | much weight on earlier presented information | jamiek88 wrote: | To see a creature with not enough confirmation bias watch a | horse if it encounters something even slightly usual. It will | shy away and or investigate or refuse to move until you have | investigated the slightly oddly positioned leaf on the path. | | If we did indeed check everything we nevertheless expected to | be as usual we'd never get anything done and would get stuck in | mega loops. | kleton wrote: | Horses spooked by unexpected street markings | https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TMyf6ewi7E8 | mrfusion wrote: | I don't think adults are much better. "Listen to the experts" and | all that. | lwansbrough wrote: | You are more likely to obtain the correct result from a | credentialed expert than doing your own research. This should | be clear in the ever growing landscape of unthinking people | using "research" as a proxy for confirmation bias. | cerved wrote: | not just children ___________________________________________________________________ (page generated 2021-07-10 23:00 UTC)