Preschoolers’ use of cue validities as weights in decision-making: Certainty does not substantially change the world

IF 1.9 3区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY
Stefanie Lindow, Anne Lehmann, David Buttelmann, Tilmann Betsch
{"title":"Preschoolers’ use of cue validities as weights in decision-making: Certainty does not substantially change the world","authors":"Stefanie Lindow, Anne Lehmann, David Buttelmann, Tilmann Betsch","doi":"10.1017/jdm.2023.36","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract A child’s world is full of cues that may help to learn about decision options by providing valuable predictions. However, not all cues are always equally valid. To enhance decision-making, one should use cue validities as weights in decision-making. Prior research showed children’s difficulty in doing so. In 2 conceptual replication studies, we investigated preschoolers’ competencies when they encounter a cue whose prediction is always correct. We assessed 5- to 6-year-olds’ cue evaluations and decision-making in an information-board-game. Participants faced 3 cues when repeatedly choosing between 2 locations to find treasures: A nonprobabilistic, high-validity cue that always provided correct predictions ( p = 1) paired with 2 probabilistically correct (Study 1: p = .34, p = .17) or 2 nonprobabilistic, incorrect cues (Study 2: p = 0). Participants considered cue validities—albeit in a rudimentary form. In their cue evaluations, they preferred the high-validity cue, indicating their ability to understand and use cue validity for evaluations. However, in their decision-making, they did not prioritize the high-validity cue. Rather, they frequently searched and followed the predictions of less valid (Study 1) and incorrect cues (Study 2). Our studies strengthen the current state of decision research suggesting that the systematic use of cue validities in decision-making develops throughout childhood. Apparently, having appropriate cue evaluations that reflect cue validities is not sufficient for their use in decision-making. We discuss our findings while considering the importance of learning instances for the development of decision competencies.","PeriodicalId":48045,"journal":{"name":"Judgment and Decision Making","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Judgment and Decision Making","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/jdm.2023.36","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract A child’s world is full of cues that may help to learn about decision options by providing valuable predictions. However, not all cues are always equally valid. To enhance decision-making, one should use cue validities as weights in decision-making. Prior research showed children’s difficulty in doing so. In 2 conceptual replication studies, we investigated preschoolers’ competencies when they encounter a cue whose prediction is always correct. We assessed 5- to 6-year-olds’ cue evaluations and decision-making in an information-board-game. Participants faced 3 cues when repeatedly choosing between 2 locations to find treasures: A nonprobabilistic, high-validity cue that always provided correct predictions ( p = 1) paired with 2 probabilistically correct (Study 1: p = .34, p = .17) or 2 nonprobabilistic, incorrect cues (Study 2: p = 0). Participants considered cue validities—albeit in a rudimentary form. In their cue evaluations, they preferred the high-validity cue, indicating their ability to understand and use cue validity for evaluations. However, in their decision-making, they did not prioritize the high-validity cue. Rather, they frequently searched and followed the predictions of less valid (Study 1) and incorrect cues (Study 2). Our studies strengthen the current state of decision research suggesting that the systematic use of cue validities in decision-making develops throughout childhood. Apparently, having appropriate cue evaluations that reflect cue validities is not sufficient for their use in decision-making. We discuss our findings while considering the importance of learning instances for the development of decision competencies.
学龄前儿童在决策中使用提示效度作为权重:确定性不会实质性地改变世界
儿童的世界充满了线索,这些线索可能有助于通过提供有价值的预测来学习决策选项。然而,并非所有线索都同样有效。为了加强决策,我们应该在决策中使用提示效度作为权重。先前的研究表明,孩子们很难做到这一点。在两个概念重复研究中,我们调查了学龄前儿童在遇到预测总是正确的线索时的能力。我们在一个信息棋盘游戏中评估了5到6岁儿童的线索评估和决策。当参与者在两个地点之间反复选择寻找宝藏时,他们面临3个线索:一个非概率的、高有效性的线索,它总是提供正确的预测(p = 1),另一个是非概率的、正确的线索(研究1:p = 0.34, p = 0.17),或者两个非概率的、错误的线索(研究2:p = 0)。参与者考虑线索的有效性——尽管是基本的形式。在线索评价中,他们更倾向于高效度线索,这表明他们有能力理解和使用线索效度进行评价。然而,在他们的决策中,他们并没有优先考虑高效度的线索。相反,他们经常搜索和遵循不太有效的线索(研究1)和不正确的线索(研究2)的预测。我们的研究加强了决策研究的现状,表明在整个童年时期,决策中系统地使用线索效度。显然,有适当的线索评价来反映线索效度是不足以使其在决策中使用的。我们讨论了我们的发现,同时考虑了学习实例对决策能力发展的重要性。
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
Judgment and Decision Making
Judgment and Decision Making PSYCHOLOGY, MULTIDISCIPLINARY-
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
8.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
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