Abstract

That conditional, if-then reasoning does not emerge until 4–5 years has long been accepted. Here we show that children barely 3 years old can do conditional reasoning. All that was needed was a superficial change to the stimuli: When color was a property of the shapes (line drawings of a star and truck) rather than of the background (as in all past conditional discrimination [CD] testing), 3-year-olds could succeed. Three-year-olds do not seem to use color to inform them which shape is correct unless color is a property of the shapes themselves. While CD requires integrating color and shape information, the dimensional change card sort (DCCS) task requires keeping those dimension cognitively separate – inhibiting attention to one (e.g., shape) when sorting by the other (e.g., color). For DCCS, a superficial change to the stimuli that is the inverse of what helps on CD enables 3-year-olds to succeed when normally they do not until years. As we and others have previously shown, 3-year-olds can succeed at DCCS when color is a property of the background (e.g., a white truck on a red background), instead of a property of the stimulus (e.g., a red truck on a white background, as in standard DCCS). Our findings on CD and DCCS suggest that scaffolding preschoolers’ emerging conceptual skills by changing the way stimuli look (perceptual bootstrapping) enables 3-year-olds to demonstrate reasoning abilities long thought beyond their grasp. Evidently, children of 3 years have difficulty mentally separating dimensions (e.g., color and shape) of the same object and difficulty mentally integrating dimensions not part of the same object. Our present CD findings plus our earlier DCCS findings provide strong evidence against prominent cognitive complexity, conditional reasoning, and graded memory theories for why 3-year-olds fail these two tasks. The ways we have traditionally queried children may have obscured the budding reasoning competencies present at 3 years of age.

Highlights

  • In conditional discrimination (CD) tasks with children (Gollin and Liss, 1962; Gollin, 1965; Andrews et al, 2012), which response is correct is conditional on which of two colors is present: Shape A is correct when Color 1 is present and Shape B is correct when Color 2 is present

  • Analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to test all hypotheses except for hypotheses concerning the binary variable of pass/fail, for which Fisher’s exact test was used

  • Children of 4 years took an average of 16.3 trials (SD = 9.5) to succeed on the standard CD task when color and shape were separated in the stimuli

Read more

Summary

Introduction

In conditional discrimination (CD) tasks with children (Gollin and Liss, 1962; Gollin, 1965; Andrews et al, 2012), which response is correct is conditional on which of two colors is present: Shape A is correct when Color 1 is present and Shape B is correct when Color 2 is present. Instead of making color a property of the background or of the outside border on stimulus cards (as in all previous CD experiments with children), we made color a property of the stimuli themselves (the shapes were either Color 1 or Color 2). This manipulation allowed children of 3 years to succeed

Methods
Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call