Effects of explaining on children's preference for simpler hypotheses.
Research suggests that the process of explaining influences causal reasoning by prompting learners to favor hypotheses that offer "good" explanations. One feature of a good explanation is its simplicity. Here, we investigate whether prompting children to generate explanations for observed effects increases the extent to which they favor causal hypotheses that offer simpler explanations, and whether this changes over the course of development. Children aged 4, 5, and 6 years observed several outcomes that could be explained by appeal to a common cause (the simple hypothesis) or two independent causes (the complex hypothesis). We varied whether children were prompted to explain each observation or, in a control condition, to report it. Children were then asked to make additional inferences for which the competing hypotheses generated different predictions. The results revealed developmental differences in the extent to which children favored simpler hypotheses as a basis for further inference in this task: 4-year-olds did not favor the simpler hypothesis in either condition; 5-year-olds favored the simpler hypothesis only when prompted to explain; and 6-year-olds favored the simpler hypothesis whether or not they explained.
Department of Psychology, University of California, San Diego, 9500 Gillman Dr., # 0109, La Jolla, CA, 92093-0109, USA. carenwalker@ucsd.edu.
Caren M
CM
Walker
Department of Psychology, Rutgers University - Newark, 334 Smith Hall, Newark, NJ, 07102, USA.
Elizabeth
E
Bonawitz
Department of Psychology, University of California, Berkeley, 3210 Tolman Hall, Room 1221, Berkeley, CA, 94720, USA.
Tania
T
Lombrozo
D002648:Child; D002657:Child Development; D002675:Child, Preschool; D003071:Cognition; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007858:Learning; D008297:Male; D002666:Psychology, Child; D013850:Thinking
Causal inference; Cognitive development; Explanation; Simplicity