She made it with her friend: How social object history influences children's thinking about the value of digital objects.

Two studies examine how social object histories from collaborative experiences influenced North American children (N = 160, 5-10 years) thinking about the value of digital objects (48% male/51% female; 51% White/24% Black/11% Asian). With forced-choice judgments, Study 1 found (moderate-large effects) that children viewed digital and physical objects with social histories as more special than objects without such histories. On a 10-point scale, Study 2 found (large effects) that children rated digital objects with positive social histories as more special than objects with negative ones. Overall, the studies found that children's tendencies to use object history to understand object value extends into digital contexts. They also reveal how an unexplored kind of history-social history-affects judgments.

Beware the myth: learning styles affect parents', children's, and teachers' thinking about children's academic potential.

Three experiments examine how providing learning style information (a student learns hands-on or visually) might influence thinking about that student's academic potential. Samples were American and predominately white and middle-class. In Experiment 1, parents (N = 94) and children (N = 73, 6-12 years) judged students who learn visually as more intelligent than hands-on learners. Experiment 2 replicated this pattern with parents and teachers (N = 172). In Experiment 3 (pre-registered), parents and teachers (N = 200) predicted that visual learners are more skilled than hands-on learners at "core" school subjects (math/language/social sciences, except science), whereas, hands-on learners were skilled at non-core subjects (gym/music/art). Together, these studies show that learning style descriptions, resultant of a myth, impact thinking about children's intellectual aptitudes.

Ownership as an extension of self: An alternative to a minimalist model.

Our commentary challenges Boyer's model by arguing that the extended-self is a more likely basis for ownership psychology. We outline how self-based principles of investment and control might structure thinking about ownership and related rights. We end by expanding the extended-self account to include welfare, as a way of understanding the contexts under which ownership is upheld or violated.

How essentialist reasoning about language acquisition relates to educational myths and policy endorsements.

How people conceptualize learning is related to real-world educational consequences across many domains of education. Despite its centrality to the educational system, we know little about how the public reasons about language acquisition, and the potential consequences for their thinking about real-world issues (e.g., policy endorsements). The current studies examined people's essentialist beliefs about language acquisition (e.g., that language is innate and biologically based), then investigated how individual differences in these beliefs related to the endorsement of educational myths and policies. We probed several dimensions of essentialist beliefs, including that language acquisition is innate, genetically based, and wired in the brain. In two studies, we tested specific hypotheses regarding the extent to which people use essentialist thinking when reasoning about: learning a specific language (e.g., Korean), learning a first language more generally, and learning two or more languages. Across studies, participants were more likely to essentialize the ability to learn multiple languages than one's first language, and more likely to essentialize the learning of multiple languages and one's first language than the learning of a particular language. We also found substantial individual differences in the degree to which participants essentialized language acquisition. In both studies, these individual differences correlated with an endorsement of language-related educational neuromyths (Study 1 and pre-registered Study 2), and rejection of educational policies that promote multilingual education (Study 2). Together, these studies reveal the complexity of how people reason about language acquisition and its corresponding educational consequences.

Preliminary evidence for progressions in ownership reasoning over the preschool period.

Defining developmental progressions can be an important step in identifying developmental precursors and mechanisms of change, within and across areas of reasoning. In one exploratory study, we examine whether the development of children's thinking about ownership follows a systematic progression wherein some components emerge reliably before others. We examine this issue in a sample of 72 children: 40 older 2-year-olds, Mage = 2.78 (.14); R = 2.50-3.00, and 32 older 4-year-olds, Mage = 4.77 (.16); R = 4.50-5.00, living in Michigan in the United States. We use a battery of four established ownership tasks that tested different aspects of children's ownership thinking. A Guttman test revealed a reliable sequence that explained 81.9% of children's performance. Namely, we discovered that identifying familiar owned objects emerged first, control of permission as a cue to ownership second, understanding ownership transfers third, and the tracking of sets of identical objects last. This ordering suggests two foundational ownership abilities on which more complex reasoning may be built: the ability to include information about familiar owners in children's mental models of objects and recognizing that control is central to ownership. The observed progression is an important first step toward developing a formal ownership scale. This study paves the way for mapping the conceptual and information-processing demands (e.g., executive functioning, memory) that likely underlie change in ownership thinking across childhood. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2023 APA, all rights reserved).

A Slippery Myth: How Learning Style Beliefs Shape Reasoning about Multimodal Instruction and Related Scientific Evidence.

The learning style myth is a commonly held myth that matching instruction to a student's "learning style" will result in improved learning, while providing mismatched instruction will result in suboptimal learning. The present study used a short online reasoning exercise about the efficacy of multimodal instruction to investigate the nature of learning styles beliefs. We aimed to: understand how learning style beliefs interact with beliefs about multimodal learning; characterize the potential complexity of learning style beliefs and understand how this short exercise might influence endorsements of learning styles. Many participants who believed in the learning style myth supported the efficacy of multimodal learning, and many were willing to revise their belief in the myth after the exercise. Personal experiences and worldviews were commonly cited as reasons for maintaining beliefs in learning styles. Findings reveal the complexity of learning style beliefs, and how they interact with evidence in previously undocumented ways.

Components and Mechanisms: How Children Talk About Machines in Museum Exhibits.

The current investigation examines children's (N = 61; 4- to 8-year old) learning about a novel machine in a local history museum. Parent-child dyads were audio-recorded as they navigated an exhibit that contained a novel artifact: a coffee grinder from the turn of the 20th century. Prior to entering the exhibit, children were randomly assigned to receive an experimental "component" prompt that focused their attention on the machine's internal mechanisms or a control "history" prompt. First, we audio-recorded children and their caregivers while they freely explored the exhibit, and then, we measured children's learning by asking them two questions in a test phase. Children of all ages, regardless of the prompt given, discussed most aspects of the machine, including the whole machine, its parts, and, to a lesser extent, its mechanisms. In the test phase, older children recalled more information than younger children about all aspects of the machine and appeared more knowledgeable to adult coders. Overall, this suggests that children of all ages were motivated to discuss all aspects of a machine, but some scaffolding may be necessary to help the youngest children take full advantage of these learning opportunities. While the prompts did not significantly influence the number of children who discussed the machine's mechanisms, children who received the component prompt were rated as more knowledgeable about the machine in the test phase, suggesting that this prompt influenced what they learned. Implications for visitor experience and exhibit design are discussed.

Who knows what? Preschoolers appreciate the link between ownership and knowledge.

We investigated 4- and 5-year-olds' (N = 194) appreciation of the link between knowledge and ownership. Namely, we asked whether preschoolers appreciate the ways in which owners are typically knowledgeable about artifacts. Experiment 1 revealed that 4- and 5-year-olds view owners as better sources of knowledge about artifacts than those who simply like artifacts. Experiment 2 built on these findings by showing that 5-year-olds appreciate that owners typically have deep knowledge about artifacts and that they can use this appreciation to guide inferences about who owns what. These experiments are some of the first to investigate how children's inferences about knowledge and ownership are intertwined. As such, they have implications for our understanding of early childhood cognition. First, they provide insights into how object-person relations influence judgments of expertise. Second, they extend current understandings of ownership by demonstrating that ownership influences preschoolers' reasoning in other domains (i.e., knowledge) and by showing that preschoolers' theories of ownership extend beyond normative considerations (i.e., ownership rights). Together, these findings lay the groundwork for a new area of work on how ownership influences children's reasoning about knowledge. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2020 APA, all rights reserved).

Ownership Matters: People Possess a Naïve Theory of Ownership.

Ownership is at the heart of people's daily activities and has been throughout history. People consider ownership when acting on objects, engaging in financial matters, and assessing the acceptability of actions. We propose that people's understanding of ownership depends on an early-emerging, causally powerful, naïve theory of ownership. We draw on research from multiple disciplines to suggest that, from childhood, a naïve theory of ownership includes ontological commitments, causal-explanatory reasoning, and unobservable constructs. These components are unlikely to stem from other core theories or from noncausal representations. We also address why people might have a naïve theory of ownership, how it develops across the lifespan, and whether aspects of this theory may be universal despite variation across cultures and history.

She bought the unicorn from the pet store: Six- to seven-year-olds are strongly inclined to generate natural explanations.

In two experiments (N = 64), we told 6- to 7-year-olds about improbable or impossible outcomes (Experiment 1) and about impossible outcomes concerning ordinary or magical agents (Experiment 2). In both experiments, children claimed that the outcomes were impossible and could not happen, but nonetheless generated realistic and natural explanations for the outcomes. These findings show that 6- to 7-year-olds are strongly inclined to provide natural explanations. The findings are also informative about children's judgments about whether outcomes are possible, and further suggest that asymmetries between children's predictions and explanations may stem from differences in how these 2 forms of reasoning are constrained by possibility. (PsycINFO Database Record

"Because It's Hers": When Preschoolers Use Ownership in Their Explanations.

Young children show competence in reasoning about how ownership affects object use. In the present experiments, we investigate how influential ownership is for young children by examining their explanations. In three experiments, we asked 3- to 5-year-olds (N = 323) to explain why it was acceptable (Experiments 1-3) or unacceptable (Experiment 2 and 3) for a person to use an object. In Experiments 1 and 2, older preschoolers referenced ownership more than alternative considerations when explaining why it was acceptable or unacceptable for a person to use an object, even though ownership was not mentioned to them. In Experiment 3, ownership was mentioned to children. Here, younger preschoolers frequently referenced ownership when explaining unacceptability of using an object, but not when explaining why using it was acceptable. These findings suggest that ownership is influential in preschoolers' explanations about the acceptability of using objects, but that the scope of its influence increases with age.

Mine, yours, no one's: children's understanding of how ownership affects object use.

Two experiments examined children's understanding of how ownership affects object use. In Experiment 1, 84 children age 4-6 were asked what a person was allowed to do with a human-made object that either belonged to the person or belonged to someone else. In Experiment 2, 44 children age 4-5 were asked what a person was allowed to do with a natural object that belonged to the person, belonged to someone else, or belonged to no one. Children were permitted to provide as many responses as they wished. Children's responses reflected an appreciation that ownership affects a wide range of object uses, including harmless object use. Children's responses also reflected an appreciation that owner's rights should be upheld regardless of whether the owner's identity is known, or whether the owner is nearby. Moreover, children's responses suggest that they view ownership as restricting nonowners from using property, rather than affecting use by entitling owners.

Preschoolers selectively infer history when explaining outcomes: evidence from explanations of ownership, liking, and use.

Two experiments provide evidence that preschoolers selectively infer history when explaining outcomes and infer past events that could have plausibly happened. In Experiment 1, thirty-three 3-year-olds and thirty-six 4-year-olds explained why a character owns or likes certain objects. In Experiment 2, thirty-four 4-year-olds and thirty-six 5-year-olds explained why a character either owns or is using the objects. Children aged 4 and 5 years, but not 3 years, inferred history when explaining ownership, but not when explaining liking or use. They also tailored their explanations to reflect likelihood, allowing them to infer plausible past events. These findings are informative about the development of children's ability to infer history in their explanations and also suggest that preschoolers appreciate that ownership depends on past investment.