An official website of the United States government
How do people use human-made objects (artifacts) to learn about the people and actions that created them? We test the richness of people’s reasoning in this domain, focusing on the task of judging whether social transmission has occurred (i.e. whether one person copied another). We develop a formal model of this reasoning process as a form of rational inverse planning, which predicts that rather than solely focusing on artifacts’ similarity to judge whether copying occurred, people should also take into account availability constraints (the materials available), and functional constraints (which materials work). Using an artifact-building task where two characters build tools to solve a puzzle box, we find that this inverse planning model predicts trial-by-trial judgments, whereas simpler models that do not consider availability or functional constraints do not. This suggests people use a process like inverse planning to make flexible inferences from artifacts’ features about the source of design ideas.
more »
« less
Children use inverse planning to detect social transmission in design of artifacts
Do children use objects to infer the people and actions that created them? We ask how children judge whether designs were socially transmitted (copied), asking if children use a simple perceptual heuristic (more similar = more likely copied), or make a rational, flexible inference (Bayesian inverse planning). We found evidence that children use inverse planning to reason about artifacts’ designs: When children saw two identical designs, they did not always infer copying occurred. Instead, similarity was weaker evidence of copying when an alternative explanation ‘explained away’ the similarity. Thus, children inferred copying had occurred less often when designs were efficient (Exp1, age 7-9; N=52), and when there was a constraint that limited the number of possible designs (Exp2, age 4-5; N=160). When thinking about artifacts, young children go beyond perceptual features and use a process like inverse planning to reason about the generative processes involved in design.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 1749551
- PAR ID:
- 10174908
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society
- ISSN:
- 1069-7977
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Fitch, T.; Lamm, C.; Leder, H.; Teßmar-Raible, K. (Ed.)Artifacts – the objects we own, make, and choose – provide a source of rich social information. Adults use people’s artifacts to judge others’ traits, interests, and social affiliations. Here we show that 4-year-old children (N=32) infer others’ shared interests from their artifacts. When asked who had the same interests as a target character, children chose the character with a conceptually similar object to the target’s – an object used for the same activity – over a character with a perceptually similar object. When asked which person had the same arbitrary property (bedtime, birthday, or middle name), children did not systematically select either character, and most often reported that they did not know. Adults (N=32) made similar inferences, but differed in their tendency to use artifacts to infer friendships. Overall, by age 4, children show a sophisticated ability to make selective, warranted inferences about others’ interests based solely on their artifacts.more » « less
-
How do children’s representations of object categories change as they grow older? As they learn about the world around them, they also express what they know in the drawings they make. Here, we examine drawings as a window into how children represent familiar object categories, and how this changes across childhood. We asked children (age 3-10 years) to draw familiar object categories on an iPad. First, we analyzed their semantic content, finding large and consistent gains in how well children could produce drawings that are recognizable to adults. Second, we quantified their perceptual similarity to adult drawings using a pre-trained deep convolutional neural network, allowing us to visualize the representational layout of object categories across age groups using a common feature basis. We found that the organization of object categories in older children’s drawings were more similar to that of adults than younger children’s drawings. This correspondence was strong in the final layers of the neural network, showing that older children’s drawings tend to capture the perceptual features critical for adult recognition. We hypothesize that this improvement reflects increasing convergence between children’s representations of object categories and that of adults; future work will examine how these age-related changes relate to children’s developing perceptual and motor capacities. Broadly, these findings point to drawing as a rich source of insight into how children represent object concepts.more » « less
-
When making social judgments, children prefer confidence over uncertainty. At the same time, they also value calibration and accuracy. How, then, do children reason about calibrated uncertainty, or intellectual humility, versus unwarranted confidence, or intellectual arrogance? Here we examined whether 4- to 11-year-olds evaluated intellectually humble individuals as more likable, more knowledgeable, nicer, and smarter than intellectually arrogant individuals. Across two studies involving 229 children (Study 1: N = 111, 59% White, 39% girls; Study 2: N = 118, 66% White, 49% girls), we found that children, by the age of 5.5 years, preferred an intellectually humble over an intellectually arrogant individual, with this preference strengthening over development. Moreover, children preferred intellectual humility over intellectual arrogance both when an intellectually humble individual appeared to be accurate (Study 1) and when it was unclear whether they were accurate (Study 2). Altogether, these findings indicate that children do not prioritize unwarranted confidence more than calibrated uncertainty in their social judgments. We conclude by highlighting pressing directions for future research surrounding what makes children prefer intellectual humility and why.more » « less
-
Abstract Emotional expressions are abundant in children’s lives. What role do they play in children’s causal inference and exploration? This study investigates whether preschool-aged children use others’ emotional expressions to infer the presence of unknown causal functions and guide their exploration accordingly. Children (age: 3.0–4.9; N = 112, the United States) learned about one salient causal function of a novel toy and then saw an adult play with it. Children explored the toy more when the adult expressed surprise than when she expressed happiness (Experiment 1), but only when the adult already knew about the toy’s salient function (Experiment 2). These results suggest that children consider others’ knowledge and selectively interpret others’ surprise as vicarious prediction error to guide their own exploration.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Conference Paper:
- The DOI is not currently available.
