Counterfactual Conditionals and False Belief

1. Counterfactual Conditionals and False Belief Eva Rafetseder, Christine Hofer & Josef Perner

2. 2 Guiding Questions 1. Under which circumstances can we conclude that children are able to reason counterfactually? 2. Based on the drawn conclusion, does there exist a connection between counterfactual reasoning and false belief?

3. Typical Counterfactual Task Harris et al. (1996) Story: Carol comeshomeandshedoesn‘ttake her shoes off. Shemakesthefloor all dirtywith her shoes. Test: Counterfactualquestion: „If Carol had taken her shoes off, would the floor be dirty or clean?“ !Childrenareabletogivethecorrectanswer „clean“ assoonasthey understand thattheconsequencehastodifferfromreality(= countertofact).

4. Results 3 - 4 correct Performance differsfromchanceforbothagegroups: D(N = 13) = 0.40, p<.01 D(N = 13) = 0.53, p<.01 0 - 2 correct Harris et al. (1996)

5. Consider! Carol didn‘ttakeher muddyshoes off and walkedoverthe clean floor. The flooris all dirty. Counterfactual (subjunctiveQuestion) If Carol hadtakenher shoes off, wouldthefloorbe clean ordirty? [clean] Hypothetical (indicativeQuestion) If Carol takesher shoes off, isthefloor clean ordirty? [clean] same (correct) answerwithandwithoutcounterfactualreasoning(!)

6. Needed Distinction Reasoningaskedforbyexperimenter (!!) Reasoningbroughttobearbychildren (??) Hypotheticalreasoning • Reasoningwithassumptions „countertofact“ • Indicative • Example: • IF (whenever) somebody takes the dirty shoes off THEN the floor is (tends to be) clean. Weshouldusetasksin which counterfactual and hypothetical reasoning give different answers to a counterfactual question in order to avoid false positives! Counterfactual reasoning • Combines assumptions with facts • Subjunctive • Example: Somebody walked with dirty shoes on the clean floor. IF this person had taken the dirty shoes off THEN the floor would have stayed clean.

7. Developmental Test Simple Version Complex Version Harris et al. (1996) Schwitalla (2010) Carol and John don‘t take their shoes off. They make the floor all dirty with their shoes. Carol doesn‘t take her shoes off. She makes the floor all dirty with her shoes. „If Carol had taken her shoes off, would the floor be dirty or clean?“ „Show me: How would the floor look?“ [clean] [dirty]

8. Results t(60) = 7.27, p < .001 Schwitalla (2010)

9. Results Schwitalla (2010) 1 cf / 1fb correct all four correct simple more simple correct complex % of 5;0 – 6;1 year olds % of 7;8 - 10;8 year olds

10. Results Schwitalla (2010) % of 7;8 - 10;8 year olds simple complex

11. … and with a different scenario?

12. Developmental Test Pilz (2005) 1st Transformation 2nd Transformation top shelf boy‘s room too short mother puts sweets OR bottom shelf girl‘s room boy comes girl comes

13. TASK ♂ Today mother puts sweets into the top box. Memory 1: Where are the sweets now? Future Hypothetical Event What will happen with the sweets, when the boy comes looking for sweets? Where will the sweets be? [boy´s room] Look, the boy comes along looking for sweets. He finds them in the top box and takes them to his room! Memory 2: Where are the sweets now? Counterfactual Event But what, if not the boy but the small girl had come along looking for sweets. Where would the sweets be? [top shelf] too short ♀

14. RESULTS Rafetseder et al (2010)

15. And now? A typical false belief task, e.g. the Maxi task, can be solved by 4 year olds…

16. Counterfactual Reasoningand False Belief Story: Peter – a firefighter – feelsseekandgoestobed. Sally – hiswife – goestothedrugstoretogetsomemedicine. While Sally isaway, thesirenssound: fire in the post office. Peter rushestothe post officetohelpput out thefire. Test: Counterfactualquestion: „If there had been no fire, where would Peter be?“ False belief question: „Wheredoes Sally think, Peter is?“ Participants: n = 28; 3;11 – 4;10 Riggs et al. (1998)

17. Results none correct 1 cf / 1fb correct all four correct more cf correct Counterfactual False belief Riggs et al. (1998) r = 0.86, p < 0.01

18. Consider! The counterfactualquestionofthefirefightertaskcanbesolvedwith „countertofact“ assumptions. Anychildwhounderstandsthatthecounterfactualquestionasks a consequencethatis different fromrealitymightanswerwith „home“ – theonlyotherpossibleanswer in thestory.

19. If there are two other possibilities… 2 possibilities 1 possibility Rafetseder & Perner (2010) χ2 (N = 133) = 33.6, p < .001) Young children can reason hypothetically with counter-to-factassumptions but no evidence of counterfactual reasoning.

20. Open Question If we use our „difficult“ CF-scenario and add an FB-question, will the FB-question still be as or more difficult than the CF-question?

21. Developmental Test Pilz (2005) 1st Transformation 2nd Transformation top shelf boy‘s room too short mother puts sweets OR bottom shelf girl‘s room boy comes girl comes

22. Simple Condition ♂ Today mother puts sweets into the bottom box. Look, the girl comes along looking for sweets. She finds them in the bottom box and takes them to her room! Sheiswearingboy‘sjacket. Mother thinksit was the boy. CounterfactualQuestion: But what, if not the girl but the boy had come along looking for sweets. Where would the sweets be? [boy’s room] False belief question: Wheredoesthemotherthinkthatthesweetsare? [boy’s room] ♀

23. Complex Condition ♂ Today mother puts sweets into the top box. Look, the boy comes along looking for sweets. He finds them in the top box and takes them to his room! He duckswhen he sneaks back tohisroom. Mother thinksit was thelittlegirl. CounterfactualQuestion: But what, if not the boy but the small girl had come along looking for sweets. Where would the sweets be? [top shelf] False belief question: • „Wheredoesthemotherthinkthatthesweetsare? [top shelf] too short ♀

24. Simple vs. Complex Condition Simple Condition • Setup: Sweets are on bottom • shelfandgirltakesthemto her • room. • Hypotheticalreasoning • Ifboycomesthen, sweetsgo • tohisroom. [boy‘sroom] • Counterfactualreasoning • Sweets were on bottomshelf. Ifboyhadcome, theywouldhavegonetohisroom. [boy‘sroom] =  Complex Condition Setup: Sweets are on top shelf and boy takes them to his room. Hypothetical reasoning If little girl comes then, sweets go to her room. [girl‘s room] Counterfactual reasoning Sweets were on top shelf. If little girl had come, they would have stayed there. [top shelf]

25. Results Beforepartiallingage out: Simple: r = 0.48, p< 0.001 Complex: r = 0.58, p< 0.001 After partiallingage out: Simple: r = 0.48, p< 0.001 Complex: r = 0.49, p< 0.001 Hofer (2010)

26. Results % of 12;4 – 14;10 year olds % of 7;0 – 8;10 year olds complex cf complex fb % of 9;3 – 11;0 year olds % of adults

27. How are cf and fb connected? Simple Condition • Setup: Sweets are on bottomshelfandgirltakesthemto her room.Sheiswearingboy‘sjacket. • False belief ofthemother: thatitistheboy • Hypotheticalreasoning(countertofact) • Ifboycomesthen, sweetsgotohisroom. [boy‘sroom] • Counterfactualreasoning • Ifboyhadcome, sweetswouldhavegonetohisroom. [boy‘sroom]

28. How are cf and fb connected? • ComplexCondition • Setup: Sweets are on top shelfandboytakesthemtohisroom. He duckswhen he sneaks back tohisroom. • False belief ofthemother: thatitisthegirl • Hypotheticalreasoning(countertofact) • Ifgirlcomesthen, sweetsgoto her room. [girl ‘s room] • Counterfactualreasoning • Ifgirlhadcome, sweetswouldhavestayed on top shelf. [top shelf]

29. Conclusion Simple Condition • Howdoestheworldlookfromtheperspectiveofanotherperson? • Counter tofactreasoning Complex Condition • How does the world look from the perspective of the other person and what can one conclude from that? Counterfactual reasoning

30. Thanks to Louisa Hacking Josef Perner Maria Schwitalla Children Andy Fugard Christine Hofer Sabrina Ecker