We've all been there. You made a promise you couldn't keep. Or something came up, and you didn't follow through on what you said you'd do.
It turns out children pay attention to what we say when we don't deliver.
A new study shows that by the time they reach preschool, kids understand that some reasons for reneging are more defensible than others.
"At 3 to 5 years old, kids are on to you. They know when you're giving a bad excuse," said first author Leon Li, who did the research with developmental psychologist Michael Tomasello as part of his Ph.D. in psychology and neuroscience at Duke.
[...] No matter what the excuse (or lack thereof), the children agreed that it was generally wrong to break a promise. But they were more understanding when the puppets offered a good excuse (i.e., they had to help someone), versus a lame one (i.e., they just wanted to do something fun instead).
In other words, children this age grasp that obligations to help others take priority over selfish desires, Li said.
The children's responses also revealed that a lame excuse was just as bad as none at all.
"Previous research has suggested that in some cases, young kids will just take any reason to be better than no reason at all," Li said. "But here we showed that kids do pay attention to the actual content."
[...] Li said the findings are also relevant to any adult who has uttered the classic fallback phrase, "Because I said so."
"Kids are paying attention and can tell that is a lame reason," Li said.
Journal Reference:
"Young Children Judge Defection Less Negatively When There's a Good Justification," Leon Li, Aren Tucker, Michael Tomasello. Cognitive Development, Nov. 3, 2022. DOI: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2022.101268
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday March 02, @06:14PM (8 children)
Post-schoolers not so much. We employ the schools to suppress the ability and demand simple conformity, so by the time they can vote, they'll just reelect any old bum into office
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday March 03, @01:30PM (3 children)
I don't think that's it, though:
1. A lot of people treat the political party they support or oppose as basically a social category or tribal affiliation that is basically immutable. This isn't because they're stupid, it's because the consequences for themselves even considering changing that feels like it risks ostracism, which all humans fear.
2. People can only decide issues based on the information they get about it. Most people don't have the time or energy to look for multiple sources, and thus will take a few sources as "the truth of the matter". And the sources that already agree with their political views are less exhausting to read/watch than the sources that disagree with them.
3. Controlling the government is a valuable-enough prize that entire industries backed by very deep pockets have sprung up to convince people to back particular positions or parties. The people who keep voting in the same idiots year after year are being duped by highly trained and often experienced professional propagandists, not just random people and certainly not people trying to find and disseminate the truth.
4. Between gerrymandering and national political parties with their very deep pockets putting their thumb on the scales to ensure that incumbents win their primaries, the odds of there being a real choice in an election are quite low to begin with.
But the most damning piece of evidence has to be that politicians and political movements that thrive on fooling their constituents into believing utter nonsense do everything in their power to prevent those constituents from getting education. If they thought schooling would help in duping their constituents, they'd want more of it, not less. Instead, they want a system where their kids go to a fancy prep school followed by Yale followed by Wharton Business School, while the kids of poor parents go through a joke of a public school where they're lucky to not get stabbed or shot and actually graduate and maybe struggle through community college to get into some sort of blue-collar trade. (Oh, and for the record, charter schools are often even worse than that, because they can inflate their stats by simply expelling any kid who isn't doing well shortly before the stats are collected.)
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by helel on Friday March 03, @05:19PM (1 child)
The most fundamental problem is the first-past-the-post voting system we have. Even if you're well informed, have cut through the propaganda, and feel no affinity to either dominant party your choice boils down to voting for the whacko-nut-job who thinks we should have mandatory genital inspections for children, voting for the democrat who thinks adults shouldn't be allowed to molest children, or voting for somebody you know has no chance in hell of winning. That's only really a two way choice between bad and worse.
Republican Patriotism [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday March 03, @05:28PM
That isn't all of it though.
For example, in my last congressional election:
1. There was no meaningful primary in either major party, and no third-party presence in the district.
2. My district was gerrymandered to be about 55-60% supporting one of the major parties.
Ergo, I could and did vote against a guy who recently made some headlines for refusing to say he'd back whoever his party's presidential nominee was even if said presidential nominee called for ending whatever parts of the US Constitution that nominee didn't like, and it didn't make the slightest difference.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 03, @07:19PM
Regardless of the external influences, for humans it still boils down to each individual's personal choice to either let the herding instinct guide them or to take their own path (and hope the herd follows), it's the only thing that separates us from other lifeforms
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 04, @02:27AM (3 children)
Tell me you peaked at age 4 without telling me you peaked at age 4...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 04, @06:29PM (2 children)
Ah... so you were the downmodder.. pretty obvious since you are in such denial. You are proof that a 4 year old can be more mature than a 13 year old
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Saturday March 04, @10:09PM (1 child)
That wasn't me, but now that you mention it, have a downmod for that one. Stay salty!
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 04, @10:42PM
Sweet.. thanks for confirming your "maturity"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by helel on Thursday March 02, @07:42PM (3 children)
If you're forced to fall back on "because I said so" your rule or decision is probably bullshit and you should really reconsider what it is you're trying to accomplish. Then again without failures of parents where would all us misanthrope on the internet be?
Republican Patriotism [youtube.com]
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 03, @03:43PM (2 children)
Tell me you don't have children without saying you don't have children.
Getting a ~3 year old to do pretty much anything goes something like this:
After going through an exchange like that hundreds of times "because I said so" becomes an easy answer to any of these questions, even though it probably won't work...
(Score: 3, Insightful) by helel on Friday March 03, @05:10PM
This kind of thing is why my opinion of other peoples intelligence has fallen drastically since becoming a parent.
Kid: I wanna go outside!
Adult: Alright, put your shoes on.
Kid: Don't wanna!
Adult: It's cold outside. You won't like the freezing ground if you have bare feet.
Kid: Don't wanna!
Adult: Ok.
Adult opens door.
Kid runs outside.
Kid: Whaaa, it's too cold!
Adult: That's why you should wear your shoes.
Kid: Fine :c
Not only is my way faster but the child learns a valuable lessen which means next time you can (probably) get out the door without even needing the test-run.
But, I imagine you typing, what if the child is fine with the temperature outside and still doesn't want to put on their shoes? Well then the weather's fine and your reason for wanting them to wear shoes was bullshit that needed to be reexamined! Just like I said so in the first place!
Republican Patriotism [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Friday March 03, @07:06PM
In the event that you're having trouble with a 3 year old. Just wait for the subsequent years. It's only downhill from there. (Not in a good way.) Still, at some point, you want them to be exerting self-control and making their own decisions. Even, if they're not rational to you. Plus, you're bound to do worse to them than let them go outside with no socks on. We are humans and no matter how you try, you're not going to be perfect. Even, if you think you're doing the perfect/right thing. Romans Chapter 7, pretty much the whole thing. Essentially Paul ranting about how he tries to do good, but finds himself doing evil anyway. Even though, he is trying to do good!
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"