Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

Infants rationally decide when and how to deploy effort

Abstract

The ability to decide whether, when and how to try is central to human learning. We investigated whether infants can make rational inferences about when and how to try on a novel problem-solving task. After learning from an adult that the task was either easy, difficult or impossible to solve, infants varied in whether, when and how they tried based on the type of social evidence that they received and on their own ongoing experience with the task. Specifically, infants formed expectations about the task, their own ability to solve the task and the experimenter’s ability to solve the task, in light of accumulating evidence across time that impacted their time spent trying, trying force, affect, and help-seeking behaviour on the task. Thus, infants flexibly integrate social input and first-hand experience in a dynamic fashion to engage in adaptive persistence.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Experimental procedure.
Fig. 2: Infants’ trying behaviour across all three indices of trying, conditions and test trials.
Fig. 3: Infants’ affect and recovery trial support across conditions.
Fig. 4: Infants’ help-seeking behaviour plotted against time spent trying.

Data availability

All data are publicly available at https://github.com/klucca/Lucca_et_al_Effort_2019.

Code availability

All code used for the analyses in the manuscript can be found at https://github.com/klucca/Lucca_et_al_Effort_2019.

References

  1. 1.

    Banerjee, P. N. & Tamis-LeMonda, C. S. Infants’ persistence and mothers’ teaching as predictors of toddlers’ cognitive development. Infant Behav. Dev. 30, 479–491 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. 2.

    Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D. & Kelly, D. R. Grit: perseverance and passion for long-term goals. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 92, 1087–1101 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Eskreis-Winkler, L., Shulman, E. P., Beal, S. A. & Duckworth, A. L. The grit effect: predicting retention in the military, the workplace, school and marriage. Front. Psychol. 5, 1–12 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Gergely, G., Bekkering, H. & Kiraly, I. Rational imitation in preverbal infants. Nature 415, 755 (2002).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Meltzoff, A. N. Understanding the intentions of others: re-enactment of intended acts by 18-month-old children. Dev. Psychol. 31, 838–850 (1995).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Schulz, L. E. & Bonawitz, E. B. Serious fun: preschoolers engage in more exploratory play when evidence is confounded. Dev. Psychol. 43, 1045–1050 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Gopnik, A. et al. A theory of causal learning in children: causal maps and Bayes nets. Psychol. Rev. 111, 3–32 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Xu, F. & Tenenbaum, J. B. Sensitivity to sampling in Bayesian word learning. Dev. Sci. 10, 288–297 (2007).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Gopnik, A. & Wellman, H. M. Reconstructing constructivism: causal models, Bayesian learning mechanisms, and the theory theory. Psychol. Bull. 138, 1085–1108 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Jara-Ettinger, J., Gweon, H., Schulz, L. E. & Tenenbaum, J. B. The naïve utility calculus: computational principles underlying commonsense psychology. Trends Cogn. Sci. 20, 785 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Liu, S., Ullman, T. D., Tenenbaum, J. B. & Spelke, E. S. Ten-month-old infants infer the value of goals from the costs of actions. Science 358, 1038–1041 (2017).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Jara-Ettinger, J., Floyd, S., Tenenbaum, J. B. & Schulz, L. E. Children understand that agents maximize expected utilities. J. Exp. Psychol. Gen. 146, 1574–1585 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Leonard, J. A., Lee, Y. & Schulz, L. E. Infants make more attempts to achieve a goal when they see adults persist. Science 1294, 1290–1294 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. 14.

    Kidd, C., Palmeri, H. & Aslin, R. Rational snacking: young children’s decision-making on the marshmallow task is moderated by beliefs about environmental reliability. Cognition 126, 109–114 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Birch, S. A. J., Akmal, N. & Frampton, K. L. Two-year-olds are vigilant of others’ non-verbal cues to credibility. Dev. Sci. 13, 363–369 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Kachel, G., Moore, R. & Tomasello, M. Two-year-olds use adults’ but not peers’ points. Dev. Sci. 21, e12660 (2018).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Zmyj, N., Daum, M. M., Prinz, W., Nielsen, M. & Aschersleben, G. Fourteen-month-olds’ imitation of differently aged models. Infant Child Dev. 12, 250–266 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. 18.

    Zmyj, N., Buttelmann, D., Carpenter, M. & Daum, M. M. The reliability of a model influences 14-month-olds’ imitation. J. Exp. Child Psychol. 106, 208–220 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Goupil, L., Romand-Monnier, M. & Kouider, S. Infants ask for help when they know they don’t know. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 113, 3492–3496 (2016).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Lucca, K., Horton, R. & Sommerville, J. Keep trying!: parental language predicts infants’ persistence. Cognition 193, 104025 (2019).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Xu, F. & Kushnir, T. Infants are rational constructivist learners. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 22, 28–32 (2013).

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Goubet, N., Rochat, P., Maire-Leblond, C. & Poss, S. Learning from others in 9–18-month-old infants. Infant Child Dev. 15, 161–177 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Repacholi, B. M., Meltzoff, A. N., Hennings, T. M. & Ruba, A. L. Transfer of social learning across contexts: exploring infants’ attribution of trait-like emotions to adults. Infancy 21, 785–806 (2016).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Messinger, D. S. & Messinger, S. Positive and negative: infant facial expressions. Psychol. Sci. 11, 1–6 (2002).

    Google Scholar 

  25. 25.

    Ekman, P. & Friesen, W. V. Facial Action Coding System: Investigator’s Guide (Consulting Psychologists Press, 1978).

  26. 26.

    West, B. T., Welch, K. B. & Galecki, A. T. Linear Mixed Models: A Practical Guide using Statistical Software. (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2014).

  27. 27.

    McCullagh, P. & Nelder, J. A. Generalized Linear Models (Chapman & Hall, 2008).

  28. 28.

    Baayen, R. H., Davidson, D. J. & Bates, D. M. Mixed-effects modeling with crossed random effects for subjects and items. J. Mem. Lang. 59, 390–412 (2008).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    R Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing (R Foundation for Statistical Computing, 2014).

  30. 30.

    Bates, D. & Maechler, M. lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R version 0.999375-35 https://github.com/lme4/lme4/ (2010).

Download references

Acknowledgements

We thank the researchers of the Early Childhood Cognition Lab at the University of Washington for their help in participant recruitment, data collection and coding. In particular, we thank A. Sedlacek, Y. Xu, J. Lee, S. Cho, K. McManus, M. Rozaniti, K. Ventura and P. Carpentier. We also thank B. Kuykendall for his assistance with the force gauge installation and data extraction, as well as the families and infants who participated in this study. This work was supported by a grant from the Society of Research on Child Development awarded to K.L., and through a grant from NICHD (no. 1R01HD076949-01) awarded to J.A.S. The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

K.L., R.H. and J.A.S. made substantial contributions to the conception and design of the work. R.H. collected the data. K.L. coordinated data coding and performed all data analyses. J.A.S. provided critical oversight and feedback of the work. K.L. and J.A.S. wrote the manuscript. R.H. provided critical feedback.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kelsey Lucca.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary results, methods and references.

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lucca, K., Horton, R. & Sommerville, J.A. Infants rationally decide when and how to deploy effort. Nat Hum Behav 4, 372–379 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-019-0814-0

Download citation

Search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing