An official website of the United States government
Examining age differences in motor learning using real-world tasks is often problematic due to task novelty and biomechanical confounds. Here, we investigated how children and adults acquire a novel motor skill in a virtual environment. Participants of three different age groups (9-year-olds, 12-year-olds, and adults) learned to use their upper body movements to control a cursor on a computer screen. Results showed that 9-year-old and 12-year-old children showed poorer ability to control the cursor at the end of practice. Critically, when we investigated the movement coordination, we found that the lower task performance of children was associated with limited exploration of their movement repertoire. These results reveal the critical role of motor exploration in understanding developmental differences in motor learning.
more »
« less
This content will become publicly available on May 13, 2026
Calculating probabilities from imagined possibilities: Limitations in 4-year-olds
Adults can calculate probabilities by running simulations and calculating proportions of each outcome. How does this ability develop? We developed a method that lets us bring computational modeling to bear on this question. A study of 40 adults and 31 4-year-olds indicates that unlike adults, many 4-year-olds use a single simulation to estimate probability distributions over simulated possibilities. We also implemented the 3-cups task, an established test of children’s sensitivity to possibilities, in a novel format. We replicate existing 3-cups results. Moreover, children who our model categorized as running a single simulation on our novel task show a signature of running a single simulation in the 3-cups task. This signature is not observed in children who were categorized as running multiple simulations. This validates our model and adds to the evidence that about half of 4-year-olds don’t evaluate multiple candidates for reality in parallel.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2121009
- PAR ID:
- 10656863
- Publisher / Repository:
- Cognitive Science Society
- Date Published:
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Body-machine interfaces, i.e. interfaces that rely on body movements to control external assistive devices, have been proposed as a safe and robust means of achieving movement and mobility; however, how children learn these novel interfaces is poorly understood. Here we characterized the learning of a body-machine interface in young unimpaired adults, two groups of typically developing children (9-year and 12-year olds), and one child with congenital limb deficiency. Participants had to control the end-effector of a robot arm in 2D using movements of the shoulder and torso. Results showed a striking effect of age - children had much greater difficulty in learning the task compared to adults, with a majority of the 9-year old group unable to even complete the task. The 12-year olds also showed poorer task performance compared to adults (as measured by longer movement times and greater path lengths), which were associated with less effective search strategies. The child with congenital limb deficiency showed superior task performance compared to age-matched children, but had qualitatively distinct coordination strategies from the adults. Taken together, these results imply that children have difficulty learning non-intuitive interfaces and that the design of body-machine interfaces should account for these differences in pediatric populations.more » « less
-
Abstract Body-machine interfaces, i.e. interfaces that rely on body movements to control external assistive devices, have been proposed as a safe and robust means of achieving movement and mobility; however, how children learn these novel interfaces is poorly understood. Here we characterized the learning of a body-machine interface in young unimpaired adults, two groups of typically developing children (9-year and 12-year olds), and one child with congenital limb deficiency. Participants had to control the end-effector of a robot arm in 2D using movements of the shoulder and torso. Results showed a striking effect of age - children had much greater difficulty in learning the task compared to adults, with a majority of the 9-year old group unable to even complete the task. The 12-year olds also showed poorer task performance compared to adults (as measured by longer movement times and greater path lengths), which were associated with less effective search strategies. The child with congenital limb deficiency showed superior task performance compared to age-matched children, but had qualitatively distinct coordination strategies from the adults. Taken together, these results imply that children have difficulty learning non-intuitive interfaces and that the design of body-machine interfaces should account for these differences in pediatric populations.more » « less
-
Abstract Adults design utterances to match listeners' informational needs by making both “generic” adjustments (e.g., mentioning atypical more often than typical information) and “particular” adjustments tailored to their specific interlocutor (e.g., including things that their addressee cannot see). For children, however, relevant evidence is mixed. Three experiments investigated how generic and particular factors affect children's production. In Experiment 1, 4‐ to 5‐year‐old children and adults described typical and atypical instrument events to a silent listener who could either see or not see the events. In later extensions, participants described the same events to either a silent (Experiment 2) or an interactive (Experiment 3) addressee with a specific goal. Both adults and 4‐ to 5‐year‐olds performed generic adjustments but, unlike adults, children made listener‐particular adjustments inconsistently. These and prior findings can be explained by assuming that particular adjustments can be costlier for children to implement compared to generic adjustments.more » « less
-
Abstract How do we learn who is good at what? Building on the idea that humans draw rich inferences from others’ emotional expressions, here we ask whether others’ surprised reactions to performance outcomes can elicit inferences about competence. Across three experiments, participants were asked to choose “who is better” in scenarios where two students performed identically on the same task but their teacher expressed surprise to only one of them. In Experiment 1 (n = 60, adults) and Experiment 2 (n = 90, 6- to 8-year-old children), participants’ responses were modulated by not only the students’ performance outcomes (success or failure) but also the teacher’s response to the outcomes (surprise or no surprise). Specifically, participants preferentially chose the student who did not elicit the teacher’s surprise as more competent when both students succeeded, but chose the student who elicited surprise when both failed. Experiment 3a (n = 150, 4- to 8-year-olds) replicated this pattern in 6- to 8-year-olds as a group—but not in 4- to 5-year-olds—with increasing robustness with age. Finally, this pattern was significantly reduced in Experiment 3b where the teacher’s surprise was directed at an irrelevant event rather than the student’s performance (n = 90, 6- to 8-year-olds). Taken together, these results suggest that even non-valenced emotional reactions to performance outcomes—being surprised at someone’s success or failure—can inform inferences about valenced qualities such as competence. More broadly, the current findings demonstrate that emotional expressions we observe in our daily lives can lead to nuanced yet consequential social judgments.more » « less
