Investigates how children and adults perceive properties of representations, suggesting distinct reasoning processes.
When reasoning about a representation (e.g., a toy lion), children often engage in “iconic realism,” whereby representations are reported to have properties of their real-life referents. The present studies examined an inverse difficulty that we dub “representational disregard”: overlooking (i.e., disregarding) a representation’s objective, non-symbolic features. In three experiments (N = 302), children (3–6 years) and adults saw a series of representations (pictures and toys) and were tested on how often they endorsed a property that was true of the real-world referent (e.g., reporting that a toy lion is dangerous; iconic realism) or rejected a property that was true of the representation (e.g., denying that a toy elephant can be lifted with one hand; representational disregard). We found that representational disregard and realism were separable tendencies. Children (and to a lesser extent, adults) displayed both, but at different rates for pictures than for toys. We conclude that children’s reasoning about representations includes a bias to overlook the features of the representation itself. Further, although pictures and toys are both representations, they provoke ontologically distinct interpretations. We discuss the implications of these results for a variety of important conceptual tasks, including learning to read, draw, or objectively evaluate scientific evidence.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Marchak et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: