Bridgers Sophie, Buchsbaum Daphna, Seiver Elizabeth, Griffiths Thomas L, Gopnik Alison
Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley.
Department of Psychology, University of Toronto.
Dev Psychol. 2016 Jan;52(1):9-18. doi: 10.1037/a0039830. Epub 2015 Nov 16.
Preschoolers use both direct observation of statistical data and informant testimony to learn causal relationships. Can children integrate information from these sources, especially when source reliability is uncertain? We investigate how children handle a conflict between what they hear and what they see. In Experiment 1, 4-year-olds were introduced to a machine and 2 blocks by a knowledgeable informant who claimed to know which block was better at activating the machine, or by a naïve informant who guessed. Children then observed probabilistic evidence contradicting the informant and were asked to identify the block that worked better. Next, the informant claimed to know which of 2 novel blocks was a better activator, and children chose 1 block to try themselves. After observing conflicting data, children were more likely to say the informant's block was better when the informant was knowledgeable than when she was naïve. Children also used the statistical data to evaluate the informant's reliability and were less likely to try the novel block she endorsed than children in a baseline group who did not observe data. In Experiment 2, children saw conflicting deterministic data; the majority chose the block that consistently activated the machine as better than the endorsed block. Children's causal inferences varied with the confidence of the informant and strength of the statistical data, and informed their future trust in the informant. Children consider the strength of both social and physical causal cues even when they disagree and integrate information from these sources in a rational way.
学龄前儿童通过直接观察统计数据和他人提供的信息来学习因果关系。孩子们能整合来自这些来源的信息吗，尤其是当信息来源的可靠性不确定时？我们研究了孩子们如何处理他们所听到的和所看到的之间的冲突。在实验1中，一位自称知道哪个积木更能激活机器的知识渊博的信息提供者，或者一位只是猜测的不知情的信息提供者，向4岁的孩子们介绍了一台机器和两块积木。然后孩子们观察到与信息提供者说法相矛盾的概率证据，并被要求找出效果更好的积木。接下来，信息提供者声称知道两块新积木中哪一块是更好的激活器，孩子们选择一块积木自己尝试。在观察到相互矛盾的数据后，当信息提供者知识渊博时，孩子们比当她不知情时更有可能说信息提供者推荐的积木更好。孩子们还利用统计数据来评估信息提供者的可靠性，并且与没有观察数据的基线组的孩子相比，他们不太可能尝试信息提供者认可的新积木。在实验2中，孩子们看到了相互矛盾的确定性数据；大多数人选择持续激活机器的积木，认为它比信息提供者推荐的积木更好。孩子们的因果推理随着信息提供者的可信度和统计数据的力度而变化，并影响了他们未来对信息提供者的信任。即使信息相互矛盾，孩子们也会考虑社会和物理因果线索的力度，并以合理的方式整合来自这些来源的信息。
