Restricted accessResearch articleFirst published online 2022-05
Tool selection based on rigidity in young children: a comparative approach ( Selección de herramientas en función de su rigidez con niños preescolares: un enfoque comparativo )
Fifty-one 23-to-55-month-old-infants faced two apparatuses that required the use of a rigid (box apparatus) or flexible (hose apparatus) stick-like tool to retrieve a toy stuck inside. Before attempting the extraction, however, they had to pick the only one tool (of three) on display that had the appropriate rigidity/flexibility to be effective. To inform their decisions, they could either manipulate the three tools themselves (haptic information) or observe the experimenter bending and unbending them for just five seconds each (visual information) before selection. Children found more difficulties in selecting appropriate flexible tools, as compared to rigid ones. Moreover, infants’ own haptic inspection of each tool did not significantly improve their selection accuracy, which indicates that observing the experimenter’s demonstration conveyed all the information required to make correct choices.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BaayenR. H.DavidsonD. J.BatesD. M. (2008). Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. Journal of Memory and Language, 59(4), 390–412. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2007.12.005
2.
BarrD. J.LevyR.ScheepersC.TilyH. J. (2013). Random effects structure for confirmatory hypothesis testing: Keep it maximal. Journal of Memory and Language, 68(3), 255–278. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jml.2012.11.001
3.
BatesD. M. (2005). Fitting linear mixed models in R. R News, 5(1), 27–30.
BrunerE. (2010). Morphological differences in the parietal lobes within the human genus: A neurofunctional perspective. Current Anthropology, 51(S1), S77–S88. https://doi.org/10.1086/650729
6.
ClearfieldM. W.StangerS. B.JenneH. K. (2015). Socioeconomic status (SES) affects means-end behavior across the first year. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 38, 22–28. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.appdev.2015.02.001
7.
FagardJ.Rat-FischerL.O’ReganJ. K. (2014). The emergence of use of a rake-like tool a longitudinal study in human infants. Frontiers in Psychology, 5, 491. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00491
8.
FalkD. (1980). A reanalysis of the South African australopithecine natural endocasts. American Journal Physical Anthropology, 53(4), 525–539. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajpa.1330530409
9.
GardinerA. K.BjorklundD. F.GreifM. L.GrayS. K. (2012). Choosing and using tools: Prior experience and task difficulty influence preschoolers’ tool-use strategies. Cognitive Development, 27(3), 240–254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2012.05.001
10.
HechtE. E.GutmanD. A.PreussT. M.SanchezM. M.ParrL. A.RillingJ. K. (2013). Process versus product in social learning: Comparative diffusion tensor imaging of neural systems for action execution–observation matching in macaques, chimpanzees, and humans. Cerebral Cortex, 23(5), 1014–1024. https://doi.org/10.1093/cercor/bhs097
11.
HollowayR. L. (2008). The human brain evolving: A personal retrospective. Annual Review of Anthropology, 37(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.anthro.37.081407.085211
12.
KalagherH.JonesS. S. (2011). Young children’s haptic exploratory procedures. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110(4), 592–602. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2011.06.007
13.
KlatzkyR. L.LedermanS.MankinenJ. M. (2005). Visual and haptic exploratory procedure in children’s judgments about tool function. Infant Behavior & Development, 28(3), 240–249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2005.05.002
14.
KöhlerW. (1925). The mentality of apes. Routledge & Kegan Paul.
15.
ManriqueH. M.GrossA. N.-M.CallJ. (2010). Great apes select tools based on their rigidity. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Animal Behavior Processes, 36(4), 409–422. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0019296
16.
ManriqueH. M.SabattiniG.CallJ.VisalberghiE. (2011). Tool choice on the basis of rigidity in capuchin monkeys. Animal Cognition, 14(6), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-011-0410-9
17.
ManriqueH. M.WalkerM. J. (2017). Early evolution of human memory. Palgrave Macmillan.
18.
MarcovitchS.ZelazoP. D. (2009). A hierarchical competing systems model of the emergence and early development of executive function. Developmental Science, 12(1), 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-7687.2008.00754.x
19.
NielsenM.BlankC. (2011). Imitation in young children: When who gets copied is more important than what gets copied. Developmental Psychology, 47(4), 1050–1053. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0023866
20.
OverH.CarpenterM. (2012). Putting the social into social learning: Explaining both selectivity and fidelity in children’s copying behavior. Journal of Comparative Psychology, 126(2), 182–192. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0024555
21.
PiagetJ. (1952). The origins of intelligence in the child. Routledge.
22.
PiagetJ. (1954). The construction of reality in the child. Routledge and Kegan Paul Ltd.
23.
Rat-FischerL.Ke Vin O’reganJ.FagardJ. (2012). The emergence of tool use during the second year of life. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(3), 440–446. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2012.06.001
24.
VallottonC.AyoubC. (2010). Use your words: The role of language in the development of toddlers’ self-regulation. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26(2), 169–181. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.09.002
