Publisher's copyright statement: NOTICE: this is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Developmental Review. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A denitive version was subsequently published in Developmental Review, 33, 4, December 2013, 10.1016/j.dr.2013.002. Additional information:Use policyThe full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-prot purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. to the frequency at which they are practiced (Rendell et al., 2011). 15The adaptive value of model-based biases have been investigated in disciplines such 16 as evolutionary biology, anthropology and non-developmental domains of psychology. 17Model-based biases have been described as "who" biases (Laland, 2004) In this section we make five propositions regarding the adaptive value of model-based biases. 54To begin, we examine children"s biases towards models whose behaviour indicates their 55 desire to transfer information, namely children"s receptiveness to pedagogical cueing. 2 for instances where this does not happen). indicating that children may select information from those more genetically related to them. 140Familiarity is a confound to this interpretation, yet familiarity itself can be a marker of in- the history of the stranger is unknown and, therefore, the information they provide may not 150 be relevant for the child"s particular environment. they stated that they "liked" rather than peers they stated that they did "not like". Likewise, 200McGuigan (2013) found that the higher the status of the model (the child"s head teacher 201 versus a known researcher) the greater the number of irrelevant actions were copied. 202Whether a model is observed by others may, in itself, be a marker of prestige; four-203 year-old children use bystanders" silent reactions to models such that a model who was 204"endorsed" by bystanders through nods and smiles was copied more for labelling novel biased copying from prestigious models is, in some circumstances, limited to behaviour

No abstract

The full-text may be used and/or reproduced, and given to third parties in any format or medium, without prior permission or charge, for personal research or study, educational, or not-for-pro t purposes provided that:• a full bibliographic reference is made to the original source • a link is made to the metadata record in DRO • the full-text is not changed in any way The full-text must not be sold in any format or medium without the formal permission of the copyright holders.Please consult the full DRO policy for further details. 74We address children's use of these strategies by investigating children's behaviour

No abstract

This study examined whether instrumental and normative learning contexts differentially influence 4- to 7-year-old children’s social learning strategies; specifically, their dispositions to copy an expert versus a majority consensus. Experiment 1 (N = 44) established that children copied a relatively competent “expert” individual over an incompetent individual in both kinds of learning context. In experiment 2 (N = 80) we then tested whether children would copy a competent individual versus a majority, in each of the two different learning contexts. Results showed that individual children differed in strategy, preferring with significant consistency across two different test trials to copy either the competent individual or the majority. This study is the first to show that children prefer to copy more competent individuals when shown competing methods of achieving an instrumental goal (Experiment 1) and provides new evidence that children, at least in our “individualist” culture, may consistently express either a competency or majority bias in learning both instrumental and normative information (Experiment 2). This effect was similar in the instrumental and normative learning contexts we applied.