背景线索对儿童选择性信任的影响:积极信息和非循环解释信息的作用

doi:10.16187/j.cnki.issn1001-4918.2025.03.02

摘要/Abstract

摘要： 儿童如何有选择地采信他人提供的信息、获取知识,是儿童社会认知发展研究的重要问题。本研究选取194名5~9岁儿童,采用冲突信息源范式,考察儿童在不同问题情境中,先前背景线索(社会性线索和认识性线索)对其选择性信任的影响。社会性线索以包含效价的评价性信息(积极/消极)来界定,认识性线索以包含因果关系的解释性信息(循环解释/非循环解释)来界定。结果表明:(1)儿童存在背景线索偏好,在社会性线索中,更多选择相信积极信息;在认识性线索中,更多选择相信非循环解释信息;(2)两类偏好线索同时呈现,在涉及因果关系的问题情境中,5岁儿童已经倾向于选择有非循环解释背景线索的信息提供者;在涉及评价的问题情境中,直到9岁,儿童才有倾向性地选择有积极效价背景线索的信息提供者,9岁前的选择是随机的;(3)在缺乏先前背景线索的问题情境中(命名问题和人际交往问题),儿童对两位信息提供者的选择是随机的。结论:儿童对两类背景线索的利用呈现出不同的年龄发展特点;随着年龄增长,儿童会依据背景线索与问题情境的相关性,灵活地做出信任决策。

关键词: 儿童, 选择性信任, 背景线索, 积极信息, 非循环解释

Abstract: It is an important issue how children selectively trust information provided by others and acquire knowledge in children’s social cognitive development. A total of 194 children aged 5 to 9 were recruited in this study, and the 'conflicting sources’ paradigm was used to investigate the influence of previous background clues (social clues and epistemic clues) on children’s selective trust in different problem situations. Social clues were defined by evaluative information containing valence (positive/negative), while epistemic clues by explanations containing causal logic (noncircular/circular). The results showed that: (1) Children have a preference for background clues. In social clues, more children choose to believe positive information, and in epistemic clues, more children choose to believe noncircular explanation; (2) When both types of preference clues were presented at the same time, in the problem situations containing causal logic, 5-year-olds were inclined to learn from the informant with the previous clue of noncircular explanations. In the problem situations containing information valence, children only at the age of 9 tended to choose the informant with the previous clue of positive information, and children before the age of 9 selected randomly; (3) In problem situations without previous relevant clues (naming problems and interpersonal problems), children’s choices of the two informants were random. The results indicate that children’s usage of the two kinds of background clues presents different age development characteristics. As children grow older, they become flexible in making trust decisions based on the relevance of previous clues to problem situations.

Key words: children, selective trust, previous clues, positive information, noncircular explanations

中图分类号:

B844

张璟, 刘格格, 曹碧华. 背景线索对儿童选择性信任的影响:积极信息和非循环解释信息的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(3): 313-321.

ZHANG Jing, LIU Gege, CAO Bihua. The Influences of Previous Clues on Children’s Selective Trust: The Role of Positive Information and Noncircular Explanations[J]. Psychological Development and Education, 2025, 41(3): 313-321.

参考文献

Bascandziev, I., & Harris, P. L. (2016). The beautiful and the accurate: Are children’s selective trust decisions biased? Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 152, 92-105.
Baum, L. A., Danovitch, J. H., & Keil, F. C. (2008). Children’s sensitivity to circular explanations.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 100(2), 146-155.
Boseovski, J. J. (2010). Evidence for “Rose-Colored Glasses”: Anexamination of the positivity bias in young children’s personality judgments. Child Development Perspectives, 4(3), 212-218.
Boseovski, J. J. (2012). Trust in testimony about strangers: Young children prefer reliable informants who make positive attributions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 111(3), 543-551.
Boseovski, J. J., Marble, K. E., & Hughes, C. (2017). Role of expertise, consensus, andinformational valence in children’s performance judgments. Social Development, 26(3), 445-465.
Boseovski, J. J., & Thurman, S. L. (2014). Evaluating and approaching a strange animal: Children’s trust in informant testimony. Child Development, 85(2), 824-834.
Castelain, T., Bernard, S., & Mercier, H. (2018). Evidence that two-year-old children are sensitive to information presented in arguments.Infancy, 23(1), 124-135.
Castelain, T., Bernard, S., Van der Henst, J. B., & Mercier, H. (2016). The influence of power and reason on young Maya children’s endorsement of testimony.Developmental Science, 19(6), 957-966.
Clegg, J. M., Kurkul, K. E., & Corriveau, K. H. (2019). Trust me, I’m a competent expert: Developmental differences in children’s use of an expert’s explanation quality to infer trustworthiness.Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 188, Article 104670. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.104670
Corriveau, K. H., & Kurkul, K. E. (2014). “Why does rain fall?”: Children prefer to learn from an informant who uses noncircular explanations. Child Development, 85(5), 1827-1835.
Croce, R. C., & Boseovski, J. J. (2020). Trait or testimony? Children’s preferences for positive informants. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 190, Article 104726. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2019.104726
Ellsberg, D. (1961). Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms.Quarterly Journal of Economics, 75(4), 643-669.
Faul, F., Erdfelder, E., Lang, A. G., & Buchner, A. (2007). G*Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences.Behavior Research Methods, 39(2), 175-191.
Fusaro, M., Corriveau, K. H., & Harris, P. L. (2011). The good, the strong, and the accurate: Preschoolers’ evaluations of informant attributes. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 110(4), 561-574.
Hermes, J., Behne, T., & Rakoczy, H. (2015). The role of trait reasoning in young children’s selective trust.Developmental Psychology, 51(11), 1574-1587.
Hermes, J., Behne, T., & Rakoczy, H. (2018). The development of selective trust: Prospects for a dual-process account. Child Development Perspectives, 12(2), 134-138.
Hermes, J., Behne, T., Bich, A., Thielert, C., & Rakoczy, H. (2018). Children’s selective trust decisions:Rational competence and limiting performance factors. Developmental Science, 21(2), Article e12527. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12527
Jarosz, A. F., & Wiley, J. (2014). What are the odds? A practical guide to computing and reporting Bayes Factors.The Journal of Problem Solving, 7(1), 2-9.
JASP Team. (2019). JASP (Version 0.16.2). [Computer software] Retrieved June 9, 2022 from https://jasp-stats.org/
Jaswal, V. K., Croft, A. C., Setia, A. R., & Cole, C. A. (2010). Youngchildren have a specific, highly robust bias to trust testimony. Psychological Science, 21(10), 1541-1547.
Kurkul, K. E., & Corriveau, K. H. (2018). Question, explanation, follow-up: A mechanism for learning from others?Child Development, 89(1), 280-294.
Kushnir, T., Vredenburgh, C., & Schneider, L. A. (2013).“Who can help me fix this toy?” The distinction between causal knowledge and word knowledge guides preschoolers’ selective requests for information. Developmental Psychology, 49(3), 446-453.
Landrum, A. R., Eaves, B. S. J., & Shafto, P. (2015). Learning to trust and trusting to learn: A theoretical framework. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 19(3), 109-111.
Landrum, A. R., & Mills, C. M. (2015). Developing expectations regarding the boundaries of expertise.Cognition, 134, 215-231.
Lane, J. D., Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (2013). Informants’ traits weigh heavily in young children’s trust in testimony and in their epistemic inferences. Child Development, 84(4), 1253-1268.
Mills, C. M., Danovitch, J. H., Rowles, S.P., & Campbell, I. L. (2017). Children’s success at detecting circular explanations and their interest in future learning. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 24(5), 1465-1477.
Miyake, A., Friedman, N. P., Emerson, M. J., Witzki, A. H., Howerter, A.,& Wager, T. D. (2000). The unity and diversity of executive functions and their contributions to complex “frontal lobe” tasks: A latent variable analysis. Cognitive Psychology, 41(1), 49-100.
Pham, M. T., & Avnet, T. (2009). Contingent reliance on the affect heuristic as a function of regulatory focus.Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 108(2), 267-278.
Ronfard, S., Bartz, D. T., Cheng, L., Chen, X., & Harris, P. L. (2018). Children’s developing ideas about knowledge and its acquisition. Advances in Child Development and Behavior, 54, 123-151.
Tong, Y., Wang, F., & Danovitch, J. (2020). The role of epistemic and social characteristics in children’s selective trust: Three meta-analyses.Developmental Science, 23(2), Article e12895. https://doi.org/10.1111/desc.12895
柴凯轩, 李宜霖, 朱莉琪. (2019). 儿童在因果知识领域内的选择性学习. 心理科学进展, 27(8), 1427-1438.
胡传鹏, 孔祥祯, Wagenmakers, E. J., Ly, A., 彭凯平. (2018). 贝叶斯因子及其在JASP中的实现. 心理科学进展, 26(6), 951-965.
李婷玉, 刘黎, 李宜霖, 朱莉琪. (2018). 冲突情境下幼儿的选择性信任和信念修正. 心理学报, 50(12), 1390-1399.
林崇德. (主编). (2018). 发展心理学. 人民教育出版社.
唐卫海, 钟汝波, 许晓旭, 刘希平. (2019). 面孔吸引力和信息正确性对幼儿选择性信任的影响. 心理学报, 51(1), 71-84.
童钰, 王福兴, 李卉. (2019). 信息提供者的先前准确性对幼儿选择性信任的影响. 心理发展与教育, 35(3), 257-266.
王静梅, 张义宾, 郑晨烨, 卢英俊, 秦金亮. (2019). 3～6岁儿童执行功能子成分发展的研究. 心理发展与教育, 35(1), 1-10.
袁鸣, 邓铸, 季培. (2013). 儿童社会认识论:儿童对信息提供者的选择性信任. 心理科学进展, 21(3), 480-486.
张璟, 李婷敏, 郑沁婷, 周双珠, 熊红星. (2020). 线索冲突情境下幼儿对不同领域知识的选择性信任特点. 心理科学, 43(2), 371-377.
张耀华, 朱莉琪.(2014).认识性信任: 学龄前儿童的选择性学习.心理科学进展, 22(1), 86-96.
张芷诺, 杜瑶, 汤玉龙. (2022). 双加工模型视角下的儿童选择性信任. 心理科学, 45(2), 379-385.
钟汝波. (2022). 儿童选择性信任决策水平发展的双加工机制及影响因素 (博士学位论文). 天津师范大学.

多维度评价

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed

[1]	李莉, 李倩倩, 阮世芳, 张云运. 师幼互动质量与儿童发展的领域内和跨领域关联——基于国内外45项实证研究的元分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(3): 332-347.
[2]	林悦, 苏彦捷. 儿童的注意瞬脱:注意在时间维度上的精细化发展[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(2): 292-304.
[3]	周海淳, 陈英和, 戚玥, 陈悦, 杜星雨, 于玲珺, 于晓. 注意缺陷多动障碍儿童的类比能力缺陷: 执行功能还是类比策略？[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(1): 1-11.
[4]	谢瑞波, 方园园, 伍新春, 阮世芳, 赵英. 小学中年级儿童成语理解的发展轨迹及其影响因素[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(1): 68-76.
[5]	徐珊珊, 黄书珍, 崔秀敏, 陈慧, 蔺秀云. 留守儿童人际敏感性与问题行为的相互作用: 个体间和个体内效应[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(1): 86-98.
[6]	李艳玮, 黄一依, 翟清灼, 周文沁, 袁宗金. 儿童早期易怒:特性、评估、风险因素与干预[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2025, 41(1): 135-144.
[7]	崔佳歆, 冯佳佳, 左钰涵, 崔占玲, 周新林. 形状知觉在儿童语言能力中的独立性预测作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 782-791.
[8]	肖雪, 李燕芳. 群体竞争对儿童公平分配行为的影响:群体偏见动机的作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 792-807.
[9]	冯瑶, 王佳雯, 沈岚岚, 李宜逊, 宋学玲, 伍新春, 李虹, 陈文, 程亚华. 小学低年级儿童部件知识对三年级汉字识别和阅读理解的预测[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 816-823.
[10]	林丹华, 冯姝慧, 申子姣, 肖家乐. 流动儿童亲子沟通与同伴侵害亚类别的关系:基于潜在剖面分析[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 832-844.
[11]	卜琳, 李晶. 早期亲子互动与儿童社会性发展——基于互动行为编码方案的应用证据[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(6): 894-904.
[12]	刘仕凡, 张蓉, 王美芳, 方永超, 赵建设. 长期经历父母体罚儿童的自发推理特点[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(5): 616-624.
[13]	刘倩文, 高晗晶, 王振宏. 亲子关系与CLOCK基因rs1801260多态性对学前儿童亲社会行为的交互影响:性别的调节作用[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(5): 625-635.
[14]	谢明珺, 孙佳宁, 肖家乐, 弓鑫钰, 林丹华. 从累加到类型视角:儿童期逆境对个体神经生理发展的影响[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(5): 737-749.
[15]	张环, 谢忠珖, 王亚丽, 秦锡权, 刘拓. 学龄中期儿童团体创造力的发展特点及其与个体创造力的关系[J]. 心理发展与教育, 2024, 40(4): 468-478.