The effects of environment and ownership on children's innovation of tools and tool material selection

Abstract

One contribution of 15 to a theme issue 'Innovation in animals and humans: understanding the origins and development of novel and creative behaviour'. Research indicates that in experimental settings, young children of 3-7 years old are unlikely to devise a simple tool to solve a problem. This series of exploratory studies done in museums in the US and UK explores how environment and ownership of materials may improve children's ability and inclination for (i) tool material selection and (ii) innovation. The first study takes place in a children's museum, an environment where children can use tools and materials freely. We replicated a tool innovation task in this environment and found that while 3-4 year olds showed the predicted low levels of innovation rates, 4-7 year olds showed higher rates of innovation than the younger children and than reported in prior studies. The second study explores the effect of whether the experimental materials are owned by the experimenter or the child on tool selection and innovation. Results showed that 5-6 year olds and 6-7 year olds were more likely to select tool material they owned compared to tool material owned by the experimenter, although ownership had no effect on tool innovation. We argue that learning environments supporting tool exploration and invention and conveying ownership over materials may encourage successful tool innovation at earlier ages.

Animal and human innovation: novel problems and novel solutions

“…Isolating the contexts in which innovation occurs potentially allows society to promote innovation by facilitating the processes that underpin an individual's, or group's, ability to design and evaluate alternatives (e.g. this issue: [ 37 ]). These issues are equally important for other animals.…”

Young children’s tool innovation across culture: Affordance visibility matters

“…Without seeing a demonstration of how to do so, they must select the straight pipecleaner and bend its end into a hook-shape, so that it may be placed down the tube and hooked onto the bucket's handle to lift it up. Young children find this task extremely challenging: Across a number of studies, only 8-20% of 4-5 year-olds spontaneously make a hook with the pipecleaner (Beck et al, 2011;Chappell et al, 2013;Cutting et al, 2014; although see Sheridan, Konopasky, Kirkwood, & Defeyter, 2016 for performance of 44% in 4-5 year-olds). It is only at about 8-9 years of age that 60-65% of children innovate the ideal hooked tool (Beck et al, 2011).…”

Do as I sayandas I do: Imitation, pedagogy, and cumulative culture

“…Is innovation a domain‐general cognitive achievement (Chiappe & MacDonald, ; Reader, Hager, & Laland, ; Reader & Laland, )? And what contexts and circumstances promote human innovation (Flynn et al, ; Reader et al, ; Sheridan et al, ; Tebbich et al, )?…”

“…Is innovation a domain-general cognitive achievement (Chiappe & MacDonald, 2005;Reader, Hager, & Laland, 2011;Reader & Laland, 2003)? And what contexts and circumstances promote human innovation Reader et al, 2016;Sheridan et al, 2016;Tebbich et al, 2016)? I will begin by following Mesoudi et al in presenting a taxonomy of innovation kinds.…”

“…Moreover, we cannot investigate innovation without getting clear on the demands of cumulative culture because, in doing so, we risk misidentifying our explanandum. This is why an account of innovation that focuses exclusively on taxonomizing innovation kinds or identifying conditions which make innovation more or less likely, though useful for various purposes, is insufficient for addressing my concerns here: specifically, identifying a process that is both conservative and creative in the ways that I outline in sections 2 and 3 (for examples of the above kinds of approaches to innovation, see Ramsey, Bastian, & Schaik, , Mesoudi et al, , Flynn, Turner, & Giraldeau, , Sheridan, Konopasky, Kirkwood, & Defeyter, , Tebbich, Griffin, Peschl, & Sterelny, , Reader, Morand‐Ferron, & Flynn, ).…”