The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.

Young preschool-aged children often have difficulty thinking about the future, but tend to reason better about another person's future than their own. This benefit may reflect psychological distance from one's own emotions, beliefs, and states that may bias thinking. In adults, reasoning f...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Wendy S C Lee, Cristina M Atance
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2016-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5065213?pdf=render
_version_ 1818988294379143168
author Wendy S C Lee
Cristina M Atance
author_facet Wendy S C Lee
Cristina M Atance
author_sort Wendy S C Lee
collection DOAJ
description Young preschool-aged children often have difficulty thinking about the future, but tend to reason better about another person's future than their own. This benefit may reflect psychological distance from one's own emotions, beliefs, and states that may bias thinking. In adults, reasoning for others who are more socially distant (i.e., dissimilar, unfamiliar other) is associated with wiser and more adaptive reasoning. The current studies examined whether this effect of social distance could be demonstrated in young children's future thinking. In a future preferences task, 3- and 4-year-olds were shown 5 pairs of child and adult items and selected which ones they would prefer when grown-up. Children answered for themselves, a socially close peer, or a socially distant peer. Social distance was manipulated by varying similarity in Study 1 and familiarity in Study 2. In Study 1, reasoning for similar and dissimilar peers was significantly more accurate than reasoning for the self, but reasoning for similar and dissimilar peers did not differ. In Study 2, scores showed a step-wise increase from self, familiar peer, to unfamiliar peer, but only reasoning for an unfamiliar peer was significantly better more accurate than reasoning for the self. Reasoning for a familiar peer did not differ from reasoning for the self or for an unfamiliar peer. These results suggest that, like adults, children benefit from psychological distance when reasoning for others, but are less sensitive to degrees of social distance, showing no graded effects on performance in Study 1 and weak effects in Study 2. Stronger adult-like effects may only emerge with increasing age and development of other socio-cognitive skills.
first_indexed 2024-12-20T19:20:18Z
format Article
id doaj.art-2e4a4dd603ee4fed839ffbb265b891eb
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 1932-6203
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-20T19:20:18Z
publishDate 2016-01-01
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
record_format Article
series PLoS ONE
spelling doaj.art-2e4a4dd603ee4fed839ffbb265b891eb2022-12-21T19:29:00ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032016-01-011110e016438210.1371/journal.pone.0164382The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.Wendy S C LeeCristina M AtanceYoung preschool-aged children often have difficulty thinking about the future, but tend to reason better about another person's future than their own. This benefit may reflect psychological distance from one's own emotions, beliefs, and states that may bias thinking. In adults, reasoning for others who are more socially distant (i.e., dissimilar, unfamiliar other) is associated with wiser and more adaptive reasoning. The current studies examined whether this effect of social distance could be demonstrated in young children's future thinking. In a future preferences task, 3- and 4-year-olds were shown 5 pairs of child and adult items and selected which ones they would prefer when grown-up. Children answered for themselves, a socially close peer, or a socially distant peer. Social distance was manipulated by varying similarity in Study 1 and familiarity in Study 2. In Study 1, reasoning for similar and dissimilar peers was significantly more accurate than reasoning for the self, but reasoning for similar and dissimilar peers did not differ. In Study 2, scores showed a step-wise increase from self, familiar peer, to unfamiliar peer, but only reasoning for an unfamiliar peer was significantly better more accurate than reasoning for the self. Reasoning for a familiar peer did not differ from reasoning for the self or for an unfamiliar peer. These results suggest that, like adults, children benefit from psychological distance when reasoning for others, but are less sensitive to degrees of social distance, showing no graded effects on performance in Study 1 and weak effects in Study 2. Stronger adult-like effects may only emerge with increasing age and development of other socio-cognitive skills.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5065213?pdf=render
spellingShingle Wendy S C Lee
Cristina M Atance
The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.
PLoS ONE
title The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.
title_full The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.
title_fullStr The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.
title_full_unstemmed The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.
title_short The Effect of Psychological Distance on Children's Reasoning about Future Preferences.
title_sort effect of psychological distance on children s reasoning about future preferences
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5065213?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT wendysclee theeffectofpsychologicaldistanceonchildrensreasoningaboutfuturepreferences
AT cristinamatance theeffectofpsychologicaldistanceonchildrensreasoningaboutfuturepreferences
AT wendysclee effectofpsychologicaldistanceonchildrensreasoningaboutfuturepreferences
AT cristinamatance effectofpsychologicaldistanceonchildrensreasoningaboutfuturepreferences