Mind the gap: How incomplete explanations influence children's interest and learning behaviors

Exposure to detectable inaccuracies makes children more diligent fact-checkers of novel claims

How do children decide when to believe a claim? Here we show that children fact-check claims more and are better able to catch misinformation when they have been exposed to detectable inaccuracies. In two experiments (N = 122), 4-7-year-old children exposed to falsity (as opposed to all true information) sampled more evidence before verifying a test claim in a novel domain. Children's evidentiary standards were graded: fact-checking increased with higher proportions of false statements heard during exposure. A simulation suggests that children's behaviour is adaptive, because increased fact-checking in more dubious environments supports the discovery of potential misinformation. Importantly, children were least diligent at fact-checking a new claim when all prior information was true, suggesting that sanitizing children's informational environments may inadvertently dampen their natural scepticism. Instead, these findings support the counterintuitive possibility that exposing children to some nonsense may scaffold vigilance towards more subtle misinformation in the future.

How does Google get its information?: Children's judgements about Google search

Children frequently use Google to answer their questions, yet what they think about Google's capacity and limitations is unclear. This study explores children's beliefs about Google's capacity to answer questions. American children ages 9 and 10 (n = 44; 18 boys and 26 girls) viewed factual questions directed towards Google or a person. After viewing each question, they reported their confidence in the informant's accuracy, the time it would take the informant to obtain the answer and how the informant would obtain the answer. Finally, they generated questions that the internet would be capable or incapable of answering. Children believed Google would be more accurate and faster than a person at answering questions. Children consistently generated appropriate questions that the internet would be good at answering, but they sometimes struggled to generate questions that the internet would not be good at answering. Implications for children's learning are discussed.

Teach a man to fish: Hyper-brain evidence on scaffolding strategy enhancing creativity acquisition and transfer

Creativity is an indispensable competency in today's innovation-driven society. Yet, the influences of instructional strategy, a key determinant of educational outcomes, on the creativity-fostering process remains an unresolved mystery. We proposed that instructional strategy affects creativity cultivation and further investigated the intricate neural mechanisms underlying this relationship. In a naturalistic laboratory setting, 66 instructor-learner dyads were randomized into three groups (scaffolding, explanation, and control), with divergent thinking instructions separately. Functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) hyperscanning simultaneously collected brain signals in the prefrontal cortex and temporal-parietal junction regions. Results indicated that learners instructed with a scaffolding strategy demonstrated superior creative performance both in acquisition (direct learning) and transfer (use in a novel context) of creativity skills, compared to pretest levels. In contrast, the control and explanation groups did not exhibit such effects. Notably, we also observed remarkable interbrain neural synchronization (INS) between instructors and learners in the left superior frontal cortex in the scaffolding group, but not in the explanation or control groups. Furthermore, INS positively predicted enhancements in creativity performance (acquisition and transfer), indicating that it is a crucial neural mechanism in the creativity-fostering process. These findings reveal that scaffolding facilitates the acquisition and transfer of creativity and deepen our understanding of the neural mechanisms underlying the process of creativity-fostering. The current study provides valuable insights for implementing teaching strategies to fostering creativity.

The role of truth and bias in parents' judgments of children's science interests

Parents' judgments about their children's level of interest in different science topics may affect the science-learning opportunities they provide their children. However, little is known about how parents judge these interests. We used the truth and bias model of judgment of West and Kenny (Psychological Review [2011], Vol. 118, pp. 357-378) to examine factors that may affect parents' judgments of their children's science interests such as the truth (children's self-reported interest) and potential sources of parental bias. We also investigated whether several individual difference measures moderated the effect of truth or bias on judgments. Children (N = 139, ages 7-11 years) rated their level of interest in five science and five non-science topics. Separately, parents (N = 139) judged their children's interest in the same topics. Overall, parents accurately judged their children's science interests, but we also found evidence of some forms of bias, namely that parents generally under-estimated their children's science interests. In addition, parents' personal science attitudes were related to judgments of science interests, such that parents more favorable of science tended to rate their children's interest in science topics higher than parents with a less favorable view. We did not find evidence that individual differences among parents moderated the effect of truth or bias on judgments; however, parents were more accurate at judging the non-science interests of older children than younger children. Parents should be aware that they may be under-estimating their children's interest in science topics and that their personal attitudes about science may be influencing their judgments of their children's science interests.

An examination of measures of young children's interest in natural object categories

Developmental research utilizes various different methodologies and measures to study the cognitive development of young children; however, the reliability and validity of such measures have been a critical issue in all areas of research practices. To address this problem, particularly in the area of research on infants' interests, we examined the convergent validity of previously reported measures of children's interests in natural object categories, as indexed by (1) parents' estimation of their child's interest in the categories, (2) extrinsic (overt choices in a task), (3) intrinsic (looking time toward objects), and (4) physiological (pupil dilation) responses to objects of different categories. Additionally, we also examined the discriminant validity of all the aforementioned measures against the well-established and validated measure of parents' estimations of children's vocabulary knowledge. Children completed two tasks: (a) an eye-tracking task, where they were presented with images from a range of defined categories, which collected indices of looking time and pupillary activity; (b) a sticker-choice task, where they were asked to choose between two sticker-images from two different categories belonging to the range of categories assessed in the previous task. Parents completed two questionnaires to estimate (i) their child's interests and (ii) vocabulary knowledge in the categories presented. We first analyzed the discriminant validity between the two parent measures, and found a significant positive association between them. Our successive analyses showed no strong or significant associations between any of our measures, apart from a significant positive association between children's looking time and parents' estimations of children's vocabulary knowledge. From our findings, we conclude that measures of infants' interests thus far may not have sufficient reliability to adequately capture any potential relationship between these measures, or index different components of interest in young children. We suggest next steps for further validation studies in infant research.

Why are there no girls? Increasing children's recognition of structural causes of the gender gap in STEM

The gender disparity in STEM fields emerges early in development. This research examined children's explanations for this gap and investigated two approaches to enhance children's structural understanding that this imbalance is caused by societal, systematic barriers. Five- to 8-year-old children (N = 145) observed girls' underrepresentation in a STEM competition; the No Structural Information condition presented no additional information, the Structural: Between-Group Comparison (Between) condition compared boys' greater representation to girls' when boys had more opportunities to practice than girls, and the Structural: Within-Group Comparison (Within) condition compared girls' greater STEM representation when they had opportunities versus not. Children in the No Structural condition largely generated intrinsic explanations; in contrast, children in both structural conditions favored structural explanations for girls' lack of participation (Experiment 1) and achievement (Experiment 2). Importantly, each structural condition also had unique effects: Between raised children's fairness concerns, while Within increased children's selection of girls as teammates in a competitive STEM activity.

Development and Testing of the Curiosity in Classrooms Framework and Coding Protocol

Curiosity is widely acknowledged as a crucial aspect of children's development and as an important part of the learning process, with prior research showing associations between curiosity and achievement. Despite this evidence, there is little research on the development of curiosity or on promoting curiosity in school settings, and measures of curiosity promotion in the classroom are absent from the published literature. This article introduces the Curiosity in Classrooms (CiC) Framework coding protocol, a tool for observing and coding instructional practices that support the promotion of curiosity. We describe the development of the framework and observation instrument and the results of a feasibility study using the protocol, which gives a descriptive overview of curiosity-promoting instruction in 35 elementary-level math lessons. Our discussion includes lessons learned from this work and suggestions for future research using the developed observation tool.

"Why do dogs pant?": Characteristics of parental explanations about science predict children's knowledge

Using a new method for examining parental explanations in a laboratory setting, the prompted explanation task, this study examines how characteristics of parental explanations about biology relate to children's knowledge. Parents (N = 148; M_age = 38; 84% female, 16% male; 67% having completed college) of children ages 7–10 (M_age = 8.92; 47% female, 53% male; 58% White, 9.5% Black, 9.5% Asian) provided answers to eight how and why questions about biology. Parents used a number of different approaches to address the questions, including providing more mechanistic responses to how questions and more teleological responses to why questions. The characteristics of parental explanations—most notably, how frequently parents provided correct responses—predicted children's performance on measures of verbal intelligence and biological knowledge. Additional exploratory analyses and implications for children's learning are discussed.