Lecture 9 - Selective Social Learning: Who to Trust?

Question 1

Outline Jean-Jacques Roseau 1712-1778 historical perspective

Answer 1

Focus autonomous learning
Children shouldn’t learn from others
They reason not copy

Question 2

Outline Piagets view on children’s learning

Answer 2

Child “autodidact” = teach themselves
Learn primarily from their own exploration and active interpretation that they gather
Learning from verbal input likely be superficial = herbalism
Children parrot back but do not deeply understand
Learning through themselves = deeper understanding

Question 3

Outline social constructivism by Vygotsky

Answer 3

Children curious explorers
Important discoveries occur in context collaborative dialogues between child and more knowledgeable members society
Scaffolding - adults offer carefully tailored support by modelling activities, providing verbal instructions
Gradually taken away. Internalised

Question 4

What is Paul Harris 2012 view on experience

Answer 4

Isn’t there a limit to role first-hand experience play cognitive development
Certain areas knowledge have learn from others e.g. past events, religion

Question 5

Outline Baldwin and Moses 1996 learning from others

Answer 5

Testimony: Info communicated others via assertions (contrast info gained sense experience)
Rely testimony others all time:

• General knowledge - science, politics
• Specific information - train times, weather
• Cultural norms and rules
• Personal info - date of birth

Question 6

What occurs when learning from others

Answer 6

Who and what to approach/avoid
What things are called
What things are for
How to categorise

Question 7

What are the types of teaching

Answer 7

Formal: explicit

Informal: everyday dialogue
adults, siblings, peers, imitation

Indirect: books, internet

Testimony not always reliable. Some sources more credible, some may be biased intent

Question 8

What are the 2 things that make a source reliable

Answer 8

Competence

Benevolence = wish share info

Question 9

Outline Epistemic Vigilance

Answer 9

Although trust beneficial, blind trust is not
Relating to knowledge, watchful and careful
Sperber et al 2010 - evaluate credibility info course and plausibility claims and calibrate trust in testimony accordingly

Needed achieve effective social learning

Question 10

Historical perspective on whether children trust everything others tell of if they are selective

Answer 10

Disposition confide in truth of others and believe what they tell us
Unlimited in children - Reid 1764. Children believe everything
Doubt, suspense judgement, disbelief all later and more complex unreflective assent
Child learns there are reliable and unreliable informants much later than it learns facts which are told it

Question 11

Recent perspective on whether children trust everything others tell of if they are selective

Answer 11

Echoes same message
Children credulous, gullible, prone towards acceptance and belief. Yet master intricacies doubt - Gilbert 1991
Credulity adaptive. Natural selection (survival fittest) might penalise experimental and sceptical turn of mind, favour simple credulity
Learning seems more efficient take on everything you are told, rather than doubt everything you are told and verify everything

Question 12

Outline early scepticism

Answer 12

Rejecting blatantly false claims
16 months infants reject false labels
3-4 years reject claims inconsistent with own perceptual judgement

Question 13

Outline Clement et al 2004 early scepticism experiment

Answer 13

Shown pompon blue colour.
Then puppet told them it was green.
When asked what colour pompon was they stuck with own judgement

Question 14

Outline Sorce, Emde, Campos and Klinnert 1985 study on early scepticism

Answer 14

12 months babies look to emotional reaction caregiver to figure out how to act in ambiguous situation
E.g. When wanting collect toy from over clear glass appears drop a baby. Mother smiling more likely go over glass than if showed fearful face

Question 15

Outline risky slopes: perceptual or social information Tamis-Lemonda et al 2008 to experiment on early scepticism

Answer 15

Different slopes varying gradient

Moms encouraged children walk down risky slopes, discouraged them walk down safe slopes

Question 16

Outline risky slopes: perceptual or social information Tamis-Lemonda et al 2008 to experiment on early scepticism RESULTS

Answer 16

18 months ignored their moms advice relying instead on perceptual info
Only relief moms advice when could not assess risk = ambiguous
Walked 74% trials mom said come down
Only 27% mom said don’t come down

Question 17

Outline Jaswal and Markman 2004 experiment on being Biased to Believe

Answer 17

Categorisation of objects.
Showed children hybrid animals, always more dominant towards 1 animal.
Then showed 2 habitats each associated to 2 animals it is made up of.
Asked match hybrid animal with habitat
Researcher try and influence infants decision by calling hybrid of name of less dominant counterpart

Question 18

Outline RESULTS of Jaswal and Markman 2004 experiment on being Biased to Believe

Answer 18

2-3years accept labels conflicting own perceptions

4 years likely accept conflicting labels if given additional info suggesting it’s an unfamiliar subtype - Jaswal 2004

6-8years more likely accept conflicting labels when stimuli ambiguous - Chan and Tradiff 2013

Question 19

Evaluation of Jaswal and Markman 2004 experiment on being Biased to Believe

Answer 19

Compliance vs Actual belief

How can you find out if children truly believe implausible info?

May feel pressured or social desire please experiment

Question 20

How to overcome the criticism of Jaswal and Markman 2004 experiment on being Biased to Believe

Answer 20

Taking experimenter out of scenario by later study getting experimenter 1 to leave room and experimenter 2 coming in and asking them to tell them about what they have been learning

Stuck with experimenters labels = internalised. Actual belief.

Question 21

What is the role of prior knowledge in assessing unexpected testimony

Answer 21

Hybrid study demonstrates role intuition/prior knowledge making trust judgements
Compare other people’s testimony to their existing knowledge
Own knowledge base strong (unambiguous) more like stick own beliefs
Own knowledge base weak (ambiguous) more likely accept implausible claims

Question 22

Outline Jaswal et al 2010 later study on Biased to Believe

Answer 22

Children video actress with stickers, hid them in 1 of 2 containers.
The girl will tell them where she hid them, but are also told they may lie.
Find sticker had to mistrust informer
Over course 8 trials 3years old continued to follow testimony. Found hard resist trusting her.

Question 23

Why are children not always epistemically vigilant due to inhibiting appropriate expectations

Answer 23

1. Responding sceptically requires inhibiting normally appropriate expectations what people say is true
   Executive Function - children default bias to trust. In order stop trusting have learn inhibit cues.
   Early years learn everything from parents who only tell them truth building up default truth

Question 24

Why are children not always epistemically vigilant due to requiring awareness others may deceive

Answer 24

Responding sceptically requires awareness others may deceive
Require ToM understand someone have FB
Only correlations NO causation

Question 25

Outline Biased to Believe, children with ASD - Yi et al 2014

Answer 25

5-10years ASD learn distrust deceptive informant repeatedly misinformation 4-6 years typically developing Typically developing children more likely distrust ToM did not correlate trust responses EF negatively correlated trust responses Supports possible role inhibitory control in distrust

Question 26

Choosing between informants: Signs if Selective Trust

Answer 26

Sensitivity to appropriate cues individuals competences e.g. mistakes/past accuracy Appreciate prior competence linked future reliability Keep person-specific info about reliability guide selective learning from reliable informants

Question 27

Outline Koenig, Clement and Harris 2994 study on informants past accuracy

Answer 27

3-4 years use informant past accuracy assess reliability current/future testimony Prefer seek help, accept new info from previously accurate 100% rather than inaccurate person

Question 28

Accuracy evaluation of Koenig, Clement and Harris 2994 study on informants past accuracy

Answer 28

Children differentiate between people always right or always wrong But this does not reflect everyday life We are not always right or always wrong

Question 29

Outline Pasquini et al 2007 children are sensitive to grades differences in speakers accuracy

Answer 29

4years sensitive relative frequency of errors 1 person right 75% time. Other person right 25% time 3 years only differentiated speakers 100%, rejected someone soon as 1 error was made Growing ability differentiate basis on relative error size between 4-7years

Question 30

Outline children are sensitive to grades difference in speakers accuracy in 4-5years

Answer 30

4-5years able differentiate from extreme differentiated error size with quantifiable measure Paying attention to different dimensions and criteria of competence

Question 31

Do children consider the reasons for speakers accuracy and inaccuracy?

Answer 31

4 years - track not only whether or not informants have been accurate in past but also: How accuracy achieved (Einav and Robinson). More likely trust someone knew answers on their own. Why informant was wrong (Nurmsoo and Robinson). More likely trust someone excuse for error.

Question 32

Outline Vanderbilt et al 2014 study on Object Labelling Task

Answer 32

3-4years accept claim accurate speaker learning novel info Willing trust testimony single informant, regardless if previously been reliable Children require conflicting testimony to demonstrate selective trust

Question 33

How do young children evaluate claims on strengths their evidence

Answer 33

Age 3: children evaluate better: Claim supported by good reason - Koenig 2012 A claim that has been verified - Butler et al 2017

Question 34

Outline Mills 2013 informant variables been found to influence children’s trust

Answer 34

``` Age Confidence Group membership Gender Attire Expertise Benevolence Familiarity Attractiveness Accent ```

Question 35

When does Mills 2013 place more trust in novel information provided by:

Answer 35

``` Informant expressing confidence Adult More attractive Informant with native rather non-native Same gender Said be nice rather mean ```

Question 36

What are the underlying motivations of selective trust

Answer 36

Epistemic considerations based perceived competence and honesty Me never social in group General positivity towards that person “halo effect” Does primary motivation change as child develops

Question 37

Does past accuracy out weight other cues?

Answer 37

4 years show greater trust informants on basis of: - Age - Familiarity - Accent - Gender Relinquish trust when past accuracy conflicts Heuristics our aside when direct evidence accuracy available Less likely among 3 years (more driven social goals?)