Magical thinking in judgments of causation: Can anomalous phenomena affect ontological causal beliefs in children and adults?

Eugene Subbotsky
{"title":"Magical thinking in judgments of causation: Can anomalous phenomena affect ontological causal beliefs in children and adults?","authors":"Eugene Subbotsky","doi":"10.1348/026151004772901140","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In four experiments, 4-, 5-, 6- and 9-year-old children and adults were tested on the entrenchment of their magical beliefs and their beliefs in the universal power of physical causality. In Experiment 1, even 4-year-olds showed some understanding of the difference between ordinary and anomalous (magical) causal events, but only 6-year-olds and older participants denied that magic could occur in real life. When shown an anomalous causal event (a transformation of a physical object in an apparently empty box after a magic spell was cast on the box), 4- and 6-year-olds accepted magical explanations of the event, whereas 9-year-olds and adults did not. In Experiment 2, the same patterns of behaviour as above were shown by 6- and 9-year-olds who demonstrated an understanding of the difference between genuine magical events and similarly looking tricks. Testing the entrenchment of magical beliefs in this experiment showed that 5-year-olds tended to retain their magical explanations of the anomalous event, even after the mechanism of the trick had been explained to them, whereas 6-and 9-year-olds did not. In Experiment 3, adult participants refused to accept magical explanations of the anomalous event and interpreted it as a trick or an illusion, even after this event was repeated 4 times. Yet, when in Experiment 4 similar anomalous causal events were demonstrated without reference to magic, most adults acknowledged, both in their verbal judgments and in their actions, that the anomalous effects were not a fiction but had really occurred. The data of this study suggest that in the modern industrialized world, magical beliefs persist but are disguised to fit the dominant scientific paradigm.","PeriodicalId":224518,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Development Psychology","volume":"32 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2004-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"99","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Development Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1348/026151004772901140","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 99

Abstract

In four experiments, 4-, 5-, 6- and 9-year-old children and adults were tested on the entrenchment of their magical beliefs and their beliefs in the universal power of physical causality. In Experiment 1, even 4-year-olds showed some understanding of the difference between ordinary and anomalous (magical) causal events, but only 6-year-olds and older participants denied that magic could occur in real life. When shown an anomalous causal event (a transformation of a physical object in an apparently empty box after a magic spell was cast on the box), 4- and 6-year-olds accepted magical explanations of the event, whereas 9-year-olds and adults did not. In Experiment 2, the same patterns of behaviour as above were shown by 6- and 9-year-olds who demonstrated an understanding of the difference between genuine magical events and similarly looking tricks. Testing the entrenchment of magical beliefs in this experiment showed that 5-year-olds tended to retain their magical explanations of the anomalous event, even after the mechanism of the trick had been explained to them, whereas 6-and 9-year-olds did not. In Experiment 3, adult participants refused to accept magical explanations of the anomalous event and interpreted it as a trick or an illusion, even after this event was repeated 4 times. Yet, when in Experiment 4 similar anomalous causal events were demonstrated without reference to magic, most adults acknowledged, both in their verbal judgments and in their actions, that the anomalous effects were not a fiction but had really occurred. The data of this study suggest that in the modern industrialized world, magical beliefs persist but are disguised to fit the dominant scientific paradigm.
因果判断中的神奇思维:异常现象会影响儿童和成人的本体论因果信念吗?
在四个实验中,研究人员测试了4岁、5岁、6岁和9岁的儿童和成人对魔法信仰的坚守程度,以及他们对物理因果关系的普遍力量的信念。在实验1中,即使是4岁的孩子也表现出对普通和异常(魔法)因果事件之间的区别有所理解,但只有6岁及以上的参与者否认现实生活中可能发生魔法。当展示一个异常的因果事件(在盒子上施了魔法后,盒子里的一个物理物体发生了变化)时,4岁和6岁的孩子接受了对这个事件的魔法解释,而9岁的孩子和成年人则不接受。在实验2中,6岁和9岁的孩子表现出了与上述相同的行为模式,他们能够理解真正的魔法事件和看起来类似的把戏之间的区别。在这个实验中测试魔法信念的巩固表明,5岁的孩子倾向于保留他们对异常事件的魔法解释,即使在把戏的机制被解释给他们之后,而6岁和9岁的孩子却没有。在实验3中,成年参与者拒绝接受对异常事件的魔法解释,并将其解释为恶作剧或错觉,即使该事件重复了4次。然而,当在实验4中类似的异常因果事件被证明与魔法无关时,大多数成年人在他们的口头判断和行动中都承认,异常效应不是虚构的,而是真实发生过的。这项研究的数据表明,在现代工业化世界,神奇的信仰仍然存在,但被伪装成符合主导的科学范式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信