Even though they don’t know terms like “impossible” and “improbable,” young children seem to grasp the concept of possibility, according to new research involving two- and three-year-olds.
A recent study published in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences reveals that toddlers can differentiate between events that are improbable and those that are impossible, and they tend to learn much more effectively after encountering impossible situations.
“It’s fascinating that toddlers have a conceptual understanding of the world in terms of what is possible,” stated Lisa Feigenson, co-director of the Johns Hopkins University Laboratory for Child Development. “While adults frequently evaluate possibilities, we aimed to find out if toddlers engage in this kind of reasoning before they accumulate years of experience and learn the language to articulate these thoughts.”
Adults often consider the likelihood of events in their daily lives. For instance, if rain is likely, it makes sense to take an umbrella. If purchasing a lottery ticket might yield a win, the expectation is usually negative. However, it was unclear whether young children practice this kind of thinking or if it develops as they grow older and gain more experiences.
In this study, two- and three-year-olds were shown a gumball-like machine containing toys. Some children saw a mixture of pink and purple toys, while others saw a machine filled exclusively with purple toys. Each child received a coin to get a toy from the machine.
The children who observed the mixed toys and drew a pink one were not surprised by their outcome since there was at least some chance, even if it was a slim one, of getting a pink toy. Conversely, some children who saw only purple toys ended up receiving a pink one, which should not have been possible.
After receiving their toys, all of the children were introduced to a made-up name for the toy and asked to recall it shortly after. The children who experienced the impossible situation of drawing a pink toy from a machine filled solely with purple ones demonstrated a significant learning advantage compared to others. However, when a pink toy was a possibility—regardless of how slim the likelihood was—there was no increase in learning reported.
“We initially thought children might learn well from improbable events and even better from impossible ones,” noted co-author Aimee Stahl, a former doctoral student in Feigenson’s lab and current associate professor of Psychology at The College of New Jersey. “Instead, we discovered that learning only happens following impossible events.”
Feigenson and Stahl theorize that toddlers learn more effectively following impossible occurrences because such surprises compel them to seek explanations. Improbable events may astonish them, but they don’t necessitate any deeper understanding. In contrast, impossible events challenge children to reconsider their previous knowledge.
“These findings are intriguing as they imply that when children witness unexplained events, it sparks a desire for knowledge that helps them adjust their understanding of reality,” said Feigenson. “From a scientific viewpoint, these results suggest that humans are innately prepared to contemplate what is possible, unlikely, or entirely unfeasible.”
Moving forward, the researchers aim to examine how this quest for explanations can be utilized in educational settings. The study indicates that parents and educators have the potential to create moments of heightened learning for children.
“By providing children with mysterious scenarios to think deeply about, parents and educators can create powerful learning opportunities,” Feigenson advised.
