180 likes | 302 Views
The development of children’s concepts of invisibility. Jacqueline D. Woolley The University of Texas Melissa A. McInnis The University of Alabama. I nvisibility. Fantasy-Reality distinction Present by age 3 (Woolley, 1997) Develops significantly between ages 3 and 7
E N D
The development of children’s concepts of invisibility Jacqueline D. Woolley The University of Texas Melissa A. McInnis The University of Alabama
Invisibility • Fantasy-Reality distinction • Present by age 3 • (Woolley, 1997) • Develops significantly between ages 3 and 7 • (Sharon & Woolley, 2004; Woolley & VanReet, 2006) • Appearance-Reality distinction • Present by age 3 • (Woolley & Wellman, 1990) • Develops significantly between ages 3 and 7 • (Flavell, Green, & Flavell, 1996; Flavell, Flavell, & Green, 1997; Moll & Tomasello, 2012)
Previous findingsInvisible real entities • Mental states • People have mental states even though one cannot see them (Wellman & Estes, 1989) • Germs • Germs can cause disease, even though they can’t be seen (Kalish, 1996) • Invisible particles • Sugar dissolved in water is still there even though one cannot see it (Au, Sidle, & Rollins, 1993; Rosen & Rozin, 1993)
Previous findingsInvisible not-real entities • By age 4 children think differently about invisible real entities like germs and fantastical entities (some of which are invisible; Harris, et al., 2006) • Children younger than 5 do not differentiate invisible agents from absent humans (Kiessling, Russell, Whitehouse, & Perner, 2013) • By age 5 children understand that events can be caused by invisible beings (Bering & Parker, 2006)
Hypotheses • Children may experience difficulty reasoning about invisibility • They may expect reality and visibility to co-occur • There may be development in children’s understanding of difference senses of invisibility • Some things are un-seeable because they are too small, whereas other things are invisible by definition or by nature • Children’s understanding of invisibility may be related to their ability to make the appearance-reality distinction
Questions • Visibility question: “Can you see X with your eyes or can you not see it?” • Reality question: “What do you think, is X real or pretend?” • If “can’t see”: • Why can’t you see X? • Can scientists (or other experts) see X? • If we had a microscope/magnifying glass, could we see X? • If we had a lot of light, could we see X?
Children’s explanations for why they couldn’t see invisible entities • Invisibility • Explicit use of the word “invisible” • Physical • Reference to a physical property or location • Human production/sense • Reference to human ability or lack thereof • Reality status • Appealed to the real or pretend nature of the entity
Expert/technology questions:Affirmative responses to whether there was some way to see invisible entities • Germs: Almost all children (86-100%). • Air: 40% of 3-year-olds, 60% of 5-year-olds, and 24% of 7-year-olds. • Songs: 75% of 3-year-olds, 58% of 5-year-olds, and no 7-year-olds. • Not-real entities: 88% of 3-year-olds, 62% of 5-year-olds, and 18% of 7-year-olds.
Conclusions • Children’s concepts of visibility and reality status are intertwined. • Children’s ability to concurrently maintain representations of both visibility and reality status develops between 3 and 7 and is related to their ability to make the AR distinction. • By age 5, children are beginning to think about how invisible real and not-real entities differ. • By age 7, children recognize two different types of invisibility.
Thank you… • to Jonathan Lane for organizing this symposium • to NICHD (grant HD-30300 to Jacqueline D. Woolley). • to the children who participated at the Children’s Research Lab at U.T. • to Sweta Daru, Brittany Kinard, and Annette Leija for their help with data collection. • to Chelsea Cornelius and Gabe Lopez-Mobilia for editorial and conceptual feedback.
Relation between AR distinction and visibility-reality distinction • Visible-real (.92) > AR (.77) • AR = invisible-real (.70) • AR > visible-not real (.38) • AR > invisible-not real (.59)