Comment by alphazard

Comment by alphazard 3 days ago

4 replies

Was anyone else very unimpressed with the video of the kid, water, and playdoh, until the very end? The whole time I was thinking that it's clearly a miscommunication, they are just assessing the kid's understanding of the word "more". If he thought it meant the tallest one, then all his answers would be correct.

But at the end, there is a question about sharing a graham cracker, which I am 100% sure a child of that age understands. They want at least the same amount of graham cracker as the other person. The kid also gets that one wrong, at the cost of his own bottom line. That really sold it.

wvbdmp 3 days ago

I think this video, and most such experiments involving children, suffer from a central issue: children are extremely sensitive to what they think adults want to hear. The kid watched the woman manipulate the things. He probably figured it would be rude not to acknowledge her changes. They should figure out a way to have another kid as the experimenter and disguise the obvious test/interview situation somehow. Especially the cracker thing feels sooo odd. I can’t believe he would let a peer get away with it, but who’s he to argue with an adult, much less a stranger?

Also children are brought up with super obvious problems like “what object fits into which hole?”. I feel like some of these tests measure less the child’s understanding of the given problem per se and more whether they have previously been introduced to trick questions/illusions.

And even controlling for all that, you’re totally right. Even adults get confused by mass, weight, volume, apparent size etc. sometimes. The kid doesn’t even intellectually know those concepts. His only input here is by sight, but his answer may be different if he got to hold both objects and feel their weight.

persnickety 3 days ago

The crackers question changes from amount to fairness. It's possible that the kid uses a different rule to evaluate it. Like "a small person needs small portions" or some variation.

I'd be convinced that the kid doesn't get it if they swapped crackers and then it stopped being fair.

  • alphazard 3 days ago

    > It's possible that the kid uses a different rule to evaluate it. Like "a small person needs small portions" or some variation.

    Fair enough. It's definitely missing the opposing case where 1 graham cracker each is split on only one side and therefore the situation goes from fair to unfair, even though it's the same amount of graham cracker.

    > I'd be convinced that the kid doesn't get it if they swapped crackers and then it stopped being fair.

    I wouldn't count on that. I think the kid (and most adults) would claim it's fair if they thought they could get away with it. The deep intuition for "fair" that I expect from children would be derived from past experience negotiating with peers, not from any kind of moral theory.

  • directevolve 3 days ago

    The kid has the same portion of cracker before and after she splits it, though.