Children’s capacity to remember a novel problem and to secure its future solution (pages 26–33)

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

DevelopmentalScience14:1(2011),pp26–33DOI:

10.1111/j.1467-7687.2010.00950.x

PAPER

Children’scapacitytorememberanovelproblemandtosecureitsfuturesolution

ThomasSuddendorf,1MarkNielsen1andRebeccavonGehlen2

1.SchoolofPsychology,UniversityofQueensland,Australia

2.FacultyofPsychologyandNeuroscience,UniversityofMaastricht,TheNetherlands

Abstract

Muchofhumans’successrestsonforesight,theabilitytopredictwhatwillhappenorwhatisneededinthefuture.Surprisinglylittleisknownabouthowthisfacultydevelops.Inthreeexperiments(N=170),3-and4-year-oldchildrenwerepresentedwithsimplepuzzles.Fifteenminuteslaterinadifferentroomtheyweregiventheopportunitytosecureasolutiontotakebacktothepuzzle.Onlytheolderchildrenperformedabovechance,whereasbothagegroupscouldsolvethetaskinaninstantcondition.Thesamepatternofresultsemergedforanothertaskinvolvingselectionofsomethingto‘feed’apuppetwhosefavoritefoodwasinitiallyunavailable.Controlconditionssuggestthattemporalratherthanspatialdisplacementinfluencedperformance.Verbalreportssubstantiatedtheconclusionthatbyage4somechildrencanrememberanovelproblemsufficientlyenoughtorecognizeasolutionandselectthatsolutioninanticipationofapplyingittotheprobleminthefuture.

Introduction

Perhapsunlikeanyothercreatureonthisplanet,humanscantravelmentallyintoboththepastandthefuture(Suddendorf&Corballis,1997,2007;Tulving,2005).Episodicmemory,theabilitytomentallyre-experiencespecificpastevents,haslongbeenacen-traltopicincognitivepsychology(Tulving,1983).Butinspiteofthefactthatitisactingwiththefuture(ratherthanpast)inmindthatconveysthemostobviousadaptiveadvantages(Suddendorf&Busby,2005),theabilitytoimaginefutureeventshasonlyrecentlyat-tractedscientificattention.Overthelasttwoyearssuchresearchinpsychology(Addis,Wong&Schacter,2008;Buckner&Carroll,2007;D’Argembeau&VanderLinden,2006;Gilbert&Wilson,2007;Suddendorf&Corballis,2007),neuroscience(Hassabis,Kumaran,Vann&Maguire,2007;Schacter,Addis&Buckner,2007;Szpunar,Watson&McDermott,2007)andanimalbehavior(Mulcahy&Call,2006;Raby,Alexis,Dickin-son&Clayton,2007;Roberts,Feeney,MacPherson,Petter,McMillan&Musolino,2008)hasflourishedandnewevidencelinkingforesightandepisodicmemorywasproclaimedasoneofthescientificbreakthroughsof2007(Science,2007).However,littleisyetknownaboutwhenandhowhumanchildrenfirstacquirethesepro-foundabilities.

Whatisknownislimitedtoasmallnumberofresearchparadigmsthat,forexample,haveinvestigatedwhatfactorsaffectchildren’scapacitytodelaygratification(Mischel&Mischel,1983;Moore,Barresi&Thompson,1998),whenchildrenbegintodifferentiatethetimesofevents(BusbyGrant&Suddendorf,2009;Friedman,2005),andwhentheybegintotalkaboutplans(Atance&Meltzoff,2005;Hudson&Fivush,1991).Theearliestcompetenceonthesetaskstypicallyappearstoemergearoundage4.Buttheapparentlinksbetweenmentaltimetravelintopastandfuturehavebeenlargelyneglected.Giventhenewevidenceforcommonalitiesinthebrainregionsandcognitiveprocessesinvolvedinthementalconstructionofpastandfutureevents,onemightexpecttofindstrongassociationsindevelopment(evenifthereare,ofcourse,fundamentaldifferencesbetweenmemoryandforesight;forareviewofsimilaritiesanddifferencesseeSuddendorf,2010).Onlyonesetofstudiesdirectlyaskedchildrentoreporteventsfromyesterdayandonesthatmightoccurtomorrow,andfoundthattheseabilitiesco-emergedbetweenage3and4years(Busby&Suddendorf,2005).Apartfromrelativelyimmediateconditions,suchasoftenemployedinobjectretrievaltasks(e.g.Deloache,1987;McColgan&McCormack,2008;Suddendorf,2003)andonepre-liminarystudy(Suddendorf&Busby,2005),weknowofnodatabearingonwhenchildrenbegintoconnect

Addressforcorrespondence:ThomasSuddendorf,SchoolofPsychology,UniversityofQueensland,BrisbaneQld4072,Australia;e-mail:t.suddendorf@psy.uq.edu.au

Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd,9600GarsingtonRoad,OxfordOX42DQ,UKand350MainStreet,Malden,MA02148,USA.

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

representationsofpastandfutureeventstomakepru-dentdecisions.

Yet,therehavebeenrecentattemptstostudythisinnonhumananimalsandearlyresultssuggestsomepotentialcompetenceingreatapesandcorvids(Correia,Dickinson&Clayton,2007;Mulcahy&Call,2006;Osvath&Osvath,2008;Rabyetal.,2007).However,therearevariousproblemswiththeseexperiments(Pre-mack,2007;Suddendorf,2006;Suddendorf&Corballis,2007,2008;Suddendorf,Corballis&Collier-Baker,2009).Onepersistentissueisthatthesestudiesinvolverepeatedexposuretothesamestimulus–rewardrela-tionships,whichraisesconcernsaboutthepotentialforassociativelearningexplanationsfortheobservedbehaviors.AccordingtotheanalysespublishedbyTul-ving(2005)andSuddendorf(e.g.Suddendorf&Busby,2003,2005;Suddendorf&Corballis,2007,2008)toruleoutothercausesforactionsthathavefuturebenefits,behavioraltestsaimingtodemonstrateepisodicforesightshouldemploythefollowingcriteria.

eofsingletrials

toavoidrepeatedexposuretothesamestimulus–rewardrelationships

eofnovelproblems

toavoidrelevantlearninghistories todemonstratecognitiveprocesses

eofdifferenttemporal spatialcontextsforthecrucialfuture-directedaction toavoidcuing

eofproblemsfromdifferentdomains

toavoidspecificbehavioralpredispositions todemonstrateflexibility.Specifictestingsituationshavebeensuggestedinwhichapreparatoryactcansecureaspecificfuturesolution(Suddendorf&Busby,2005;Tulving,2005).Thesetestswerealsoconcernedwithinvestigatingthecapacitytoanticipateafutureneedordrivestate(e.g.futurethirst),sincetheso-calledBischof-Kçhlerhypothesisholdsthatonlyhumansarecapableofdoingthis(Bischof-Kçhler,1985;Bischof,1978;Suddendorf&Corballis,1997).Butevenwithoutfuture-needanticipation,exposingsubjectstoasinglenovelproblemeventandgivingthemanopportunitytoprepareforsolvingthatprobleminthefutureatadifferentplaceinspaceandtime,maybesufficienttodemonstratesome,ifverylimited,capacityforrecallandforesight.

Followingtheseconsiderations,weherereportonthefirstexperimentstodocumentchildrenrememberingaproblemtheyexperiencedinthepastatadifferentlocationandselectingasolutionthatwillallowthemtosolvethatprobleminthefuture.Experiment1describesaninitialparadigmforfuture-directedactionthatwethenbuilduponinExperiment2toaddressallfourcriteriaoutlinedabove.Finally,Experiment3examinesthedifferentialeffectofspatialandtemporaldisplacement.

Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

Futuresolutionsofnovelproblems27

Experiment1

MethodParticipants

Thirty-fourchildren(18malesand16females)aged3years(N=17,mean=36monthsand14days,SD=19days)and4years(N=17,mean=48monthsand2days,SD=7days)participatedinthisstudy.Materials

Twowoodenboxes(14·21·21cm)featuringalargekeyholewereused.Eachhadakeyholecoveringhalfofthefrontofthebox(seeFigure1).Onekeyholewascross-shapedandtheothertriangle-shaped.Slidingakeythroughtheholeactivatedamechanisminvolvingarotatingplatformwithathinwoodenpartitiontherebyenablinghiddenobjectstoberetrieved.Fourdifferentkeyswereused,eachconsistingofashapeattachedtoa19cmwoodenrod.Twokeyshadaflattriangleattached,oneredandtheotheryellow,andtwokeyshadacross-shapeattached,andagainonewasredandtheotheryellow.Twoflatwoodensquareswerealsoused(oneredandoneyellow)asdistracteritems.Twofurtherkeyswerebrokeninhalfandwerehiddenunderneaththepresentationtable.Procedure

EachparticipantwasledintoRoomAidentifiedtothemas‘WinniethePooh’sroom’byvirtueofalargeposterhangingononewall.Halfthechildrenwerethenpre-sentedwiththeboxwithatriangularkeyholeandtheotherhalfwiththeonethatfeaturedacross-shapedkeyhole.Theexperimenterdemonstratedhowtoslideakeyintotheholeinthefrontoftheboxtoactivate

the

Figure1WoodenapparatuswithkeyholeforthetrianglekeypresentedinRoomA.

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

28ThomasSuddendorfetal.

hiddenmechanismandexposestickers.Participantswereallowedtoremoveonestickerand,aftertheapparatuswasre-set,theywereencouragedtousethetoolthem-selves.Allparticipantssuccessfullyusedthekeytogainaccesstothestickersontwoconsecutivetrials.Theexperimenterthendistractedthechildandpretendedtohaveaccidentallybrokenthekeyinhalf(i.e.surrepti-tiouslyswappingthekeyforahiddenbrokenversion)anddemonstratedthatthebrokentoolwasnownotlongenoughtooperatetheboxmechanism.Participantswereinformedthattheywouldgotoanotherroom(RoomB)toplaygamesbutthattheywouldcomebackto‘WinniethePooh’sroom’andplaywiththeboxagainlater.ThechildwasdistractedwithunrelatedgamesinRoomBfor15minutes.Attheendofthatperiodtheywereinformedthattheywere‘goingbacktotheWinniethePoohroom’andthattheycouldselectoneoffourobjectspresentedtothemonatraytotakebackwiththem.Theseobjectsincludedthetargetkeythatwasfunctionallythesameastheoriginalbutcoloreddiffer-ently(e.g.ayellowtriangle),thealternativetargetthatwascoloredthesameastheoriginalbutshapedincor-rectly(e.g.redcross)aswellastwofurtherdistractionitems(flatredandyellowsquares).Theywerethenhandedtheobjectoftheirchoiceandaskedwhytheyhadchosenit.

Resultsanddiscussion

Significantlymore4-year-olds(64.8%)than3-year-olds(29.4%)selectedthecorrectcopyofthetargettooltotakebackwiththemtoRoomA,v2(1,N=34)=4.25,p=.042.Abinominaltestrevealedthat3-year-oldsasagroupdidnotperformabovechance(25%),whereas4-year-oldsdiddoso,p=.001.Therewasnoevidenceofanyeffectofgenderoroftooltype.Ofthosewhoselectedthecorrecttool,68%verballyreferredtothefutureutilityoftheirchoicewhenaskedwhytheymadetheirselection.Forexample,a36-month-oldmalesaid:‘Toopenboxandgetstickers’,anda48-month-oldfemalestated:‘It’sbecausetheotherone’sbroken’.Incontrast,noneofthechildrenwhofailedtomaketherightchoicemadesuchreference,andinsteadjustifiedtheirchoicewithstatementssuchas:‘BecauseIwantto’(48-month-oldmale).Notsurprisingly,therewashenceastrongpositivecorrelationbetweenwhetherornotchildrenmadeverbalreferencetofutureutilityandcorrecttoolselection(F(34)=.73,p<.001),evenwhenagewaspartialledout,rp(31)=.70,p<.001.

Thisconvergenceofverbalreportandappropriatechoicesuggeststhatthesechildrendidrecallthepastproblemandconsideredthecurrentchoiceinlightofthefuturereturntothatproblem.Therewerenorepetitionsofthetestthatcouldlendthemselvestogradualasso-ciativelearning.However,itremainspossiblethatone-triallearningallowedchildrentoassociatethecorrectkeywithreward.Thus,inExperiment2weaddressedthispossibilitybypresentingchildrenonlywithaprob-Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

leminRoomA,butnotwithasolution(andhenceanopportunityforassociativelearning).

Furthermore,inExperiment1wecannotclearlyidentifytheinfluencetemporal-spatialdisplacementhashadonperformancelevels.Childrenmighthaveper-formedpoorlybecausetheycouldnotsolvetheproblemregardlessofthetemporal-spatialseparation.Therefore,tomoreconvincinglydemonstratewhenchildrencanrememberanovelproblemandactnowtosecureitsfuturesolution,Experiment2employedabetween-groupsdesigninwhichsolutionchoiceswerepresentedaftera15-minutedelayinadifferentlocationtohalfofthechildren(experimentalcondition)andinstantlyinthesamelocationfortheotherhalf(controlcondition).Wealsoincludedasecondtaskthatinvolvedsocialratherthanphysicalreasoningtoexaminethegeneralityoftheabilityandconductedthestudywithalarge,well-mat-chedsample.

Experiment2

ThisexperimentwasdesignedtomeetthefourcriteriaoutlinedintheIntroduction.Wepresentedchildrenwithsingletrials(1)ofnovelproblems(2)andgavethemanopportunitytosecuretheirsolutioninatemporalandspatiallyremovedcontext(3).InadditiontoaversionoftheboxproblempioneeredinExperiment1,wealsoincludedastructurallysimilartaskfromadifferentproblemdomain(4).MethodParticipants

Werecruited102childrentoparticipateinthisexperi-ment.Sixchildrendidnotcompletethetestingduetorestlessnessandwereexcludedfromthefinalanalysis.Halfofthechildrenhadjustturnedage3(mean=36monthsand24days;SD=13days)andtheotherhalfage4(mean=48monthsand23days;SD=21days).Ofthefinalsampleof96children,halfwereassignedtotheinstantcondition(24girlsand24boys)andhalftothedelaycondition(24boysand24girls).Themeanageofchildrenintheinstantcondition(3-year-olds=36monthsand23days;4-year-olds=48monthsand22days)wascloselymatchedtochildreninthedelaycon-dition(3-year-olds=36monthsand28days;4-year-olds=48monthsand25days).Materials

BoxesliketheonesintroducedinExperiment1wereusedhere.Onehadatrianglekeyholeandtheotherasquare-shapedkeyhole.Fourkeyswereused,eachconsistingofashape(greenstar;redcircle;orangesquare;yellowtri-angle)attachedtoapieceofdowel.Thesecondtaskinvolvedtwocommerciallyavailablehandpuppets(one

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

elephant,onetiger)andfourplastictoyfruits(straw-berry,banana,watermelonandgrapes).Procedure

Eachparticipantwastestedindividuallyontwotasks:theBoxtaskandtheFoodtask.Theorderoftaskpre-sentationwascounterbalanced.Reliabilitycodingfromvideotapewascarriedouton25%oftheparticipantsandtherewas100%agreementwiththeprimarycoderonallmeasures.

Boxtask.ThistaskwassimilartotheoneusedinExperiment1,butchildrendidnotseethesolutiontotheproblem.ParticipantswereledintoRoomA,identifiedtothemas‘TweetieBird’s’Roombyvirtueofaposter,andintroducedtotheboxwithatriangularshapedlockandthekey(seeFigure1).Theexperimenterdemon-strated,andthenletthechildrenexperience,howtousethekeytoobtaindesirableobjectsfromtheapparatus.Allchildrensuccessfullyusedthekeyontwotrials.Theboxwasthenremovedfromthetableandreplacedwiththeboxfittedwithasquarekeyhole.Thechildrenwereshownthatthetriangularkeydidnotfitintothesquarekeyholeofthisnewboxandweregiventheopportunitytoconfirmthisforthemselves.Theexperimenterempha-sizedtheproblembydeclaringthatthekeydidnotfit.Childrenintheinstantconditionwerethenledtotheothersideoftheroom,whereanothertablewashiddenbehindacurtain.Theystoodfacingthecurtainwiththeirbacktotheoriginaltable,andthecurtainwasdrawntorevealthreealternativekeys(circle,starandsquare).Withoutbeingallowedtolookatthetesttable,childrenwereaskedtopickoneoftheitemstotakeback.Inthedelaycondition,afterbeingpresentedwiththeprobleminRoomAchildrenweretoldthattheywouldgotoanotherroom(RoomB)toplaysomegames,andtheboxwasleftonthetable.After15minutesofunre-latedplayinRoomB,childrenweretoldthattheywouldnowreturnto‘TweetyBird’sroom’(RoomA)andwerethengiventhesamechoiceaschildrenintheinstantcondition.Oncechildrenselectedoneofthekeystotaketothatroom,theywereaskedwhatwasinTweetyBird’sroomandwhytheyhadchosentotakethisobjectbackwiththem.ChildrenwereledbackintoRoomAandallowedtousetheirkeytoobtainatoyfromthesquarekeyholeboxthatwasstillonthetable.Toavoiddiffer-encesinsuccessfulexperiencesandhencepotentialcarry-overeffectsonthesecondtask,childrenwhobroughtwiththemthewrongkeyalsoexperiencedsuccessatretrievingthetoyfromthebox–theexperimenterturnedthetoolaroundandusedthehandletosuccessfullyoperatethebox’shiddenmechanism(somethingnochilddidspontaneously).

Foodtask.Thistaskwasstructurallysimilarbutinotherrespectsquitedistinct.ChildrenweregivenaplasticstrawberryinRoomAandthenintroducedtoatiger

Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

Futuresolutionsofnovelproblems29

handpuppet.Theywerethentoldthat‘Terrythetiger’lovestoeatstrawberriesandweregiventheopportunityto‘feed’thetigerwiththeirplasticstrawberry.Afterthetigerexpressedcontentmentwithhismealheleftthesceneandthechildrenwereintroducedtoanotherhandpuppet,‘Ellietheelephant’.Theelephant,theyweretold,lovesbananas.TheexperimenterpointedoutthattherewerenobananasavailablethatcouldbegiventoEllie.Aswiththeboxestask,childrenintheinstantconditionwerethentakentothetablehiddenbehindthecurtain.Facingawayfromtheoriginaltablethecurtainwasdrawnandthreeplasticfruits(banana,watermelon,grapes)wererevealed.Thechildrenweretoldthattheycouldtakeoneoftheseobjectsbacktotheothertable.Inthedelaycondition,theelephantwasleftonthetableandchildrenweretoldthattheywouldnowgotoanotherroomtoplayothergames.Againchildrenplayedintheotherroomfor15minutesbeforebeinggiventheoptiontotakeoneofthethreeplasticfruitswiththemtoRoomA.Atnopointdidtheexperimenterreferbacktotheoriginalproblem.Aftertheirselection,theywereaskedwhytheychosetotaketheobjecttheydid.Chil-drenwerethenledbackintoRoomAandtheyeitherfedEllietheelephantwiththebananatheyhadbrought,or,iftheyhadfailedtoreturnwiththebanana,withtheotherfruitastheyweretoldthatEllie’ssecondfavouritefoodiswhatevertheyhadchosen(i.e.watermelonorgrapes).

Resultsanddiscussion

Thevastmajorityofchildrenintheinstantconditionpassedbothtasks(seeFigure2).Bothagegroupsper-formedabovechance(33%)onbothtasks(forallfourbinominaltests,p<.001).OntheBoxtask,performance

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

30ThomasSuddendorfetal.

wasidenticalforboth3-year-olds(87.5%success)and4-year-olds(87.5%).OntheFoodtask,again87.5%of3-year-oldspassed,and4-year-olds’performanceapproachedceiling(95.8%).Thus,whenpresentedinstantlywithpotentialsolutionsbothtaskswereeasilysolvedbypreschoolers.Bycontrast,childreninthedelayconditionhadmoredifficultyonboththeBoxtask(50%correct,v2(1)=15.71,p<.001)andtheFoodtask(44%correct,v2(1)=25.20,p<.001).Theorderoftaskpre-sentationdidnothaveaneffectonperformance,v2(1)=0.18,p=.77.

Performanceof3-year-oldsinthedelayconditionwassignificantlypoorerthanthatof3-year-oldsintheinstantcondition,v2(1)=12.8,p<.001,andthesamewastrueforthe4-year-olds,v2(1)=4,p<.05.Moreover,theperformanceof3-year-oldsinthedelayconditionswasnobetterthanwouldbeexpectedbychance(binominaltest;Boxtask:p=.406;Foodtask:p=.576).Bycontrast,4-year-oldsdemonstratedsomeforesightastheyperformedbetterthanchanceonbothtasks(binominaltest;Foodtask:p<.05;Boxtask:p<.005).Theconclusionthat4-year-oldsdemonstratedsomeforesightissupportedbytheirverbalresponsesinthedelaycondition.Immediatelyfollowingtheirselectiontheywereaskedwhytheyhadselectedtheitemtheypicked.IntheBoxtask,only13%of3-year-oldsreferredtothefutureutilityoftheirselection,whereas46%of4-year-oldsmadesuchreference.Forexample,a4-year-oldjustifiedherselectionofthesquaretoolbystating:‘costheotheronecouldnotfitinthere’,andanotherbyanswering‘becausethere’sthoseboxestostickthembackin’.Acrossbothagegroups,93%ofthosewhomadeanappropriatereferencetotheproblemhadinfactselectedthetargettool,whileonly33.3%(i.e.exactlychancelevel)ofthosewhodidnotmakesuchverbalreferencetofutureutilityselectedthecorrecttool,v2(1)=13.94,p<.001.

Similarly,ontheFoodtaskonlyoneofthe3-year-oldsreferredtotheproblem,and29%of4-year-oldsdidso.Forexample,onechildexplained:‘fortheelephant’andanother‘cosElliemightbehungryagain’.Ofthosethatdidmakesuchreference,allbutonechildselectedthecorrectfood.Curiously,this4-year-oldwhodidnotselectthefoodfortheelephantexpressedawarenessoftheproblem,butforwhateverreasonoptedagainsthelpingasshesaid:‘cosIwanttotakeitbacktotheotherroomtofeedtheelephant.Buthelikesbananas.ButIwon’tbringbananas.’Otherwisetheverbalreportsagaincloselyfitthefuture-directedaction.Acrossallchildren,38.5%ofchildrenwhodidnotrefertothefutureproblemselectedthecorrectitem,comparedto86.5%ofthosewhodid,v2(1)=5.34,p<.05.

Nonetheless,thereremainsomeconcernsaboutwhatperformanceonthesetasksreallyreflects.Inparticular,thedesigndoesnotprovideanywayofdisentanglingthecontributionsoftemporalandspatialdisplacementsinperformance.Thus,inathirdexperimentweswappedthedelayandroomconditionssuchthatchildrenhada

Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

15-minutedelayinthesameroom,andintheinstantconditionchildrenwerequicklyledtotheotherroomtomaketheirchoice.AllotheraspectsoftheBoxtaskremainedthesame,allowingustodirectlycomparetheseresultswiththoseofExperiment2.

Experiment3

MethodParticipants

Afinalsampleof40children(20ateachage)partici-patedinthisexperiment(threechildrenwerereplacedbecausetheydidnotcompletethetesting).Three-year-oldswereonaverage36.1monthsofage(SD=0.35,11boysandninegirls)and4-year-oldswereonaverage49.4monthsofage(SD=1.37,eightboysand12girls).ChildrenwererandomlyassignedtooneoftheBoxtaskconditions,eitherthe‘Instant-SpatialDisplacement’orthe‘Delay-NoSpatialDisplacement’condition.Materials

ThesamematerialsasinExperiment2wereused.Procedure

ThesameBoxtaskproceduresasoutlinedinExperiment2wereusedwiththefollowingexceptions.TheproceduredifferedinthatthedelayconditionwasconductedinRoomA(Delay-NoSpatialDisplacement),andthechoiceintheinstantconditionwaspresentedinRoomB(Instant-SpatialDisplacement).Afterpresentationoftheboxtaskproblem,childrenintheInstant-SpatialDis-placementconditionwereimmediatelyledtoRoomBandpresentedtherewiththealternativekeysasinExperiment2.IntheDelay-NoSpatialDisplacementcondition,ontheotherhand,childrenwereledtoatableattheothersideoftheroomandengagedinunrelatedplayfor15minutes.Theboxremainedontheinitialtablebutwasturnedaroundsothatchildrencouldnotseethekeyhole.Afterthedelay,childrenwerepresentedwiththeoptionsasinExperiment2.Resultsanddiscussion

ChildrenofbothagegroupsperformedabovechanceintheInstant-SpatialDisplacementcondition(binominaltest:age3:p(7 10)<.05;age4:p(10 10)<.01).Bycontrast,inthedelaycondition,performanceof4-year-oldswasabovechance(p(8 10)<.01)but3-year-olds’performancewasnot(p(5 10)=.21).TheseresultshencereplicatethefindingsofExperiment2eventhoughthespatialcomponentofeachconditionwasreversed.

NextwecomparedtheresultsdirectlywiththoseofExperiment2toexaminetheeffectsofspatialandtem-

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

poraldisplacement.Chi-squareanalyseswereconductedcomparingperformanceacrossthetwoexperimentsoneithertemporalorspatialfactors,respectively,whiletheotherfactorwasheldconstant.Spatialdisplacementshadnosignificanteffectontheperformanceofchildren.Therewerenosignificantdifferencesbetweenthetwoinstantconditions(v2=0.08;p=.78)andthetwodelayconditions(v2=1.28;p=.26).Temporaldisplacement,ontheotherhand,didhaveasignificanteffect.Thedelayconditionwasmoredifficultthantheinstantconditionwhencomparingtestsinthesameroom(v2=4.62,p=.03)andwhencomparingperformanceintheroomshiftconditions(v2=7.22,p=.01).Theseresultsstronglysupporttheclaimthatitisthetemporaldisplacementratherthanthespatialdisplacementthatcausesyoungchildren’sdifficulties.

Generaldiscussion

Theseresultsdemonstratethatby48monthsofagesomechildrenhavesufficientmemoryandforesighttosecurethefuturesolutionofanovelproblem.TheperformanceontheBoxtaskofExperiment2showsthattheycandothisevenwithouteverhavingseenthesolutiontotheproblem.TogetherwiththeresultsfromtheFoodtaskofExperiment2,wecanconcludethatchildrenmusthave(a)rememberedtheproblem,(b)appreciatedtheverbalinstructionthattheyweretoreturntoRoomAsuffi-cientlytoanticipateareturntotheproblemand(c)identifiedoneofthechoicesasasolutiontotherepresentedproblem.Thecapacityofthe48-month-oldgroupwasconfirmedbytheverbaljustificationsfortheirchoices,andisconsistentwiththeirperformanceinExperiment1.

The36-month-olds,ontheotherhand,didnotasagroupperformabovechanceexpectations.Theydidnotfailthetasksbecausetheproblemitselfwastoodifficult,astheydidwellintheinstantconditions.Thissuggeststhattheirfailureisattributabletothetemporal-spatialchange.TheresultsofExperiment3showthatitwasthetemporalratherthanthespatialdisplacementthatmakesthetaskmoredifficult.Thecurrentdatacannottellus,however,whyexactlythetemporaldisplacementcausedthemtoperformatchance.Theirproblemmayderivefromimmaturityinone,orseveral,ofarangeofabilitiesimplicatedinforesight(Suddendorf&Corballis,2007).Hencefailureonourtaskdoesnotdemonstrateabsenceofanycapacityatrecallandforesight,andourdatamayunderestimatesuchcapacitiesin3-year-oldchildren.However,thecurrentdatadodemonstrateabasiccom-petenceformentallyaccessingapastprobleminordertomakeappropriatedecisionstosecureafuturesolution;acompetenceclearlyshownbythe48-month-oldstestedherebutonethathasnotyetbeenconvincinglydem-onstratedinanynonhumananimal.

Indeed,acasehasbeenmadethatthereissomethinguniquelyhumanaboutourforesightandthatitsemer-Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

Futuresolutionsofnovelproblems31

gencemighthavebeenaprimemoverinhumanevolution(Suddendorf&Corballis,1997,2007).Towhatextentanyotherspeciessharesourcapacityforforesightandlong-termplanningiscurrentlythesubjectofmuchdebate(Mulcahy&Call,2006;Premack,2007;Rabyetal.,2007;Robertsetal.,2008;Suddendorf&Corballis,2007,2008).Intheabsenceoflanguage,animalscannottelluswhatisontheirminds,butnon-verbalversionsofthecurrentparadigmcouldallowthemtodemonstrateforesightintheiractions.Innovativenewstudiessuggestthathumans’closestlivingrelativesmaybeabletoselectandkeepatooltosolveafutureproblem(Mulcahy&Call,2006;Osvath&Osvath,2008).Unlikethepresentresearch,however,theseapeshadlearnedtousethetar-gettoolandcouldoverrepeatedtrialsinthesameenvi-ronmentselectthesamecorrecttooltoobtainthefuturereward(Suddendorf,2006;Suddendorfetal.,2009).Here,takingadvantageofthefactthatchildrenarefareasiertorecruit,weconstructedarelativelylarge,between-groupsstudywhereeachchildwaspresentedwiththeproblemonlyonce.FollowingSuddendorf(e.g.Suddendorf&Busby,2003)andTulving(2005)ourparadigmisbasedonfourcriteriaasoutlinedintheIntroduction:useofsingle,novelproblems,fromdiffer-entdomains,andtargetselectionwithtemporal spatialdisplacement.Accordingly,theparadigmdevelopedinExperiment2avoidspotentiallearningexplanationsand,inconjunctionwiththecontrolconditions,candemon-stratesomebasiccapacityatmemoryandforesight.Whetherthisqualifiesforthelabel‘mentaltimetravel’willnodoubtattractdebate.

Toexaminefurtherwhatgovernsperformance,variouslinesofresearchwouldappearpromising.Ifthebasictaskmeasuresmentaltimetravel,thenpeoplethathavebeenshowntohaveepisodicmemoryimpairmentswouldbepredictedtodopoorlyonadultversionsofthistask.Forexample,amnesicpatientslikeKC,whowasinstru-mentalinthedevelopmentoftheconceptepisodicmemory(Rosenbaum,Kohler,Schacter,Moscovitch,Westmacott,Black,Gao&Tulving,2005;Tulving,1985),shouldfailsuchtests.Passingourtask,ofcourse,onlyrequiresanticipationoftheimmediatefutureanddoesnotdemonstratetherangeofforesightcapacitiesevidentinclinicallynormalhumanadults.Indeed,thecurrentparadigmdoesnotexaminethekindofforesightsometimespurportedtosethumansapartfromotheranimals:future-needanticipation(Bischof,1978;Sud-dendorf&Corballis,1997).Futurestudiesmayhencewanttobuildonthisbasicapproachtomanipulateneedstatesindifferentrooms(e.g.securingafuturedrinkwhilecurrentlyquenched).Futurestudiesmayalsowanttovarythetimebetweentargetselectionandimple-mentationofthechoice,butsuchtasksfacetheconsid-erableproblemofinformingchildrenaboutwheninthefuturetheirchoicewillhaveaneffect.Herewehave,atminimum,demonstratedthatbyage4somechildrencananticipatetheimmediatereturntoanovel,rememberedproblemandsecureitssolution.

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

32ThomasSuddendorfetal.

Withregardtorecall,itisimportanttonotethatnon-verbalmemorytaskshaveshownthatevenchildrenmuchyoungerthan48months(aswellasnonhumananimals)canlearnfrompastexperiences.Forexample,at3monthsinfantsmaylearntokickamobile(Hayne&Rovee-Collier,1995)andanobjectmaytrigger6-month-oldstocopyapreviouslyexperiencedactionsequence(Barr,Dowden&Hayne,1996).However,itisnotclearthatanyoftheseparadigmsreflectamemorythatisaboutaspecificpastevent(i.e.episodicratherthansemanticorproceduralmemory).Fullyverbalparadigmsthatinvestigateepisodicmemorysuggestthatthiscapacitymayonlyemergebetweenages3and4years(Nelson&Fivush,2004;Perner&Ruffman,1995),whichisinlinewiththeageatwhichchildhoodamnesiaceasesandimplicatedprefrontalsystemsmature(Levine,2004).Thecurrentevidenceformemoryofasinglenoveleventsubstantiatesthisconclusion.

Differencesinmemorycapacitymayexplainthedif-ferencesinperformancebetween3-and4-year-olds.Butmemoryaloneisnotsufficienttopassthetasksintro-ducedinExperiment2.Theolderpreschoolchildrendemonstratedforesight–theyknewwhatwasneededinatleasttheimmediatefuture.Thecurrentparadigmhasestablishedthatchildrenwereabletoselecttheobjectthatsolvedtheanticipatedfutureproblemevenwithouthavinghadexperiencewith,andhencememoryof,thesolution.Thereisofcoursestillmuchthesechildrenwilllearnabouttime,andtheirforesightisprobablysub-stantiallylimitedbyarangeoffactors(Suddendorf&Corballis,2007).ButthesedatademonstratethefirstrudimentarycompetenceatafacultythatmaybeessentialtoanyexplanationastohowhumanshavechangedthefaceoftheEarth.

Acknowledgements

WegratefullyacknowledgethesupportoftheAustralianResearchCouncil(DiscoveryGrantDP0770113)andthankPhilippaNearyandJesseKeenefortheirhelpwiththedatagathering.WealsothankMichaelCorballis,JasonMattingley,NickMulcahy,VirginiaSlaughter,BillvonHippelandEndelTulvingforcommentsonanearlierversionofthisarticle.

References

Addis,D.R.,Wong,A.T.,&Schacter,D.L.(2008).Age-relatedchangesintheepisodicsimulationoffutureevents.Psycho-logicalScience,19,33–41.

Atance,C.M.,&Meltzoff,A.N.(2005).Myfutureself:youngchildren’sabilitytoanticipateandexplainfuturestates.CognitiveDevelopment,20,341–361.

Barr,R.,Dowden,A.,&Hayne,H.(1996).Developmentalchangesindeferredimitationby6-to24-month-oldinfants.InfantBehaviorandDevelopment,19,159–171.

Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

Bischof,N.(1978).Onthephylogenyofhumanmorality.InG.S.Stent(Ed.),Moralityasbiologicalphenomenon(pp.53–74).Berlin:DahlemKonferenzen.

Bischof-Kçhler,D.(1985).ZurPhylogenesemenschlicherMotivation[Onthephylogenyofhumanmotivation].InL.H.Eckensberger&ntermann(Eds.),EmotionundReflexivität(pp.3–47).Vienna:Urban&Schwarzenberg.Buckner,R.L.,&Carroll,D.C.(2007).Self-projectionandthebrain.TrendsinCognitiveSciences,11(2),49–57.

Busby,J.,&Suddendorf,T.(2005).Recallingyesterdayandpredictingtomorrow.CognitiveDevelopment,20,362–372.BusbyGrant,J.,&Suddendorf,T.(2009).Preschoolersbegintodifferentiatethetimesofeventsfromthroughoutthelifespan.EuropeanJournalofDevelopmentalPsychology,6,746–762.Correia,S.P.C.,Dickinson,A.,&Clayton,N.S.(2007).Wes-ternscrub-jaysanticipatefutureneedsindependentlyoftheircurrentmotivationalstate.CurrentBiology,17(10),856–861.D’Argembeau,A.,&VanderLinden,M.(2006).Individualdifferencesinthephenomenologyofmentaltimetravel:theeffectofvividvisualimageryandemotionregulationstrate-gies.ConsciousnessandCognition,15(2),342–350.

Deloache,J.S.(1987).Rapidchangeinthesymbolicfunction-ingofveryyoungchildren.Science,238(4833),1556–1557.Friedman,W.J.(2005).Developmentalandcognitiveperspec-tivesonhumans’senseofthetimesofpastandfutureevents.LearningandMotivation,36,145–158.

Gilbert,D.T.,&Wilson,T.D.(2007).Prospection:experienc-ingthefuture.Science,317,1351–1354.

Hassabis,D.,Kumaran,D.,Vann,S.D.,&Maguire,E.A.(2007).Patientswithhippocampalamnesiacannotimaginenewexperiences.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,104(5),1726–1731.Hayne,H.,&Rovee-Collier,C.(1995).Theorganizationofreactivatedmemoryininfancy.ChildDevelopment,66(3),893–906.

Hudson,J.A.,&Fivush,R.(1991).Planninginthepreschoolyears:theemergenceofplansfromgeneraleventknowledge.CognitiveDevelopment,6(4),393–415.

Levine,B.(2004).Autobiographicalmemoryandtheselfintime:brainlesioneffects,functionalneuroanatomy,andlifespandevelopment.BrainandCognition,55,54–68.

McColgan,K.L.,&McCormack,T.(2008).Searchingandplanning:youngchildren’sreasoningaboutpastandfutureeventsequences.ChildDevelopment,79,1477–1497.

Mischel,H.N.,&Mischel,W.(1983).Thedevelopmentofchildren’sknowledgeofself-controlstrategies.ChildDevel-opment,54,603–619.

Moore,C.,Barresi,J.,&Thompson,C.(1998).Thecognitivebasisoffuture-orientedprosocialbehavior.SocialDevelop-ment,7(2),198–218.

Mulcahy,N.J.,&Call,J.(2006).Apessavetoolsforfutureuse.Science,312,1038–1040.

Nelson,K.D.,&Fivush,R.(2004).Theemergenceofauto-biographicalmemory:asocialculturaldevelopmentaltheory.PsychologicalReview,111(2),486–511.

Osvath,M.,&Osvath,H.(2008).Chimpanzee(Pantroglo-dytes)andorangutan(Pongoabelii)forethought:self-controlandpre-experienceinthefaceoffuturetooluse.AnimalCognition,11,661–674.

Perner,J.,&Ruffman,T.(1995).Episodicmemoryandautonoeticconsciousness:developmentalevidenceandatheoryofchildhoodamnesia.JournalofExperimentalChildPsychology,59(3),516–548.

心理学英文文献,关于儿童的认知能力过程及其发展。

Premack,D.(2007).Humanandanimalcognition:continuityanddiscontinuity.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,104(35),13861–13867.

Raby,C.R.,Alexis,D.M.,Dickinson,A.,&Clayton,N.S.(2007).Planningforthefuturebywesternscrub-jays.Nature,445(7130),919–921.

Roberts,W.A.,Feeney,M.C.,MacPherson,K.,Petter,M.,McMillan,N.,&Musolino,E.(2008).Episodic-likememoryinrats:isitbasedonwhenorhowlongago?Science,320,113–115.

Rosenbaum,R.S.,Kohler,S.,Schacter,D.L.,Moscovitch,M.,Westmacott,R.,Black,S.E.,Gao,F.,&Tulving,E.(2005).ThecaseofKC:contributionsofamemory-impairedpersontomemorytheory.Neuropsychologia,43(7),989–1021.

Schacter,D.L.,Addis,D.R.,&Buckner,R.L.(2007).Rememberingthepasttoimaginethefuture:theprospectivebrain.NatureReviewsNeuroscience,8,657–661.

Science(2007).Breakthroughoftheyear:therunners-up.Sci-ence,318,1844–1849.

Suddendorf,T.(2003).Earlyrepresentationalinsight:twenty-four-month-oldscanuseaphototofindanobjectintheworld.ChildDevelopment,74,896–904.

Suddendorf,T.(2006).Foresightandevolutionofthehumanmind.Science,312(5776),1006–1007.

Suddendorf,T.(2010).Episodicmemoryversusepisodicfore-sight:similaritiesanddifferencesWileyInterdisciplinaryReviews:CognitiveScience,1,99–107.

Suddendorf,T.,&Busby,J.(2003).Mentaltimetravelinanimals?TrendsinCognitiveSciences,7,391–396.

Ó2010BlackwellPublishingLtd.

Futuresolutionsofnovelproblems33

Suddendorf,T.,&Busby,J.(2005).Makingdecisionswiththefutureinmind:developmentalandcomparativeidentifica-tionofmentaltimetravel.LearningandMotivation,36(SpecialIssue),110–125.

Suddendorf,T.,&Corballis,M.C.(1997).Mentaltimetravelandtheevolutionofthehumanmind.Genetic‘Social’andGeneralPsychologyMonographs,123,133–167.

Suddendorf,T.,&Corballis,M.C.(2007).Theevolutionofforesight:whatismentaltimetravelandisituniquetohumans?BehavioralandBrainSciences,30,299–313.

Suddendorf,T.,&Corballis,M.C.(2008).Newevidenceforanimalforesight?AnimalBehaviour,75,e1–e3.

Suddendorf,T.,Corballis,M.C.,&Collier-Baker,E.(2009).Howgreatisgreatapeforesight?AnimalCognition,12,751–754.

Szpunar,K.K.,Watson,J.M.,&McDermott,K.B.(2007).Neuralsubstratesofenvisioningthefuture.ProceedingsoftheNationalAcademyofSciencesoftheUnitedStatesofAmerica,104(2),642–647.

Tulving,E.(1983).Elementsofepisodicmemory.Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Tulving,E.(1985).Memoryandconsciousness.CanadianPsychology,26(1),1–12.

Tulving,E.(2005).Episodicmemoryandautonoesis:uniquelyhuman?InH.S.Terrace&J.Metcalfe(Eds.),Themissinglinkincognition(pp.3–56).Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.Received:4January2009Accepted:5November2009

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/wb8e.html