How Does Instance-Based Inference About Event Frequencies Develop? An Analysis with a Computational Process Model

To make inferences about the frequency of events in the world (e.g., the prevalence of diseases or the popularity of consumer products), people often exploit observations of relevant instances sampled from their personal social network. How does this ability to infer event frequencies by searching and relying on personal instance knowledge develop from childhood to adulthood? To address this question, we conducted a study in which children (age 8–11 years) and adults (age 19–34 years) judged the relative frequencies of first names in Germany. Based on the recalled instances of the names in participants’ social networks, we modeled their frequency judgments and the underlying search process with a Bayesian hierarchical latent-mixture approach encompassing different computational models. We found developmental differences in the inference strategies that children and adults used. Whereas the judgments of most adults were best described by a noncompensatory strategy that assumes limited and sequentially ordered search (social-circle model), the judgments of most children were best described by a compensatory strategy that assumes exhaustive search and information aggregation (availability-by-recall). Our results highlight that already children use instance knowledge to infer event frequencies but they appear to search more exhaustively for instances than adults. One interpretation of these results is that the ability to conduct ordered and focused search is a central aspect in the development of noncompensatory instance-based inference.

[1]  P. H. Miller,et al.  A developmental perspective on executive function. , 2010, Child development.

[2]  R. Hertwig,et al.  Judgments of risk frequencies: tests of possible cognitive mechanisms. , 2005, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[3]  Jörg Rieskamp,et al.  When easy comes hard: the development of adaptive strategy selection. , 2011, Child development.

[4]  Robin I. M. Dunbar,et al.  Social network size in humans , 2003, Human nature.

[5]  T. Betsch,et al.  Lost in search: (Mal-)adaptation to probabilistic decision environments in children and adults. , 2016, Developmental psychology.

[6]  Thomas T. Hills,et al.  Dynamic search and working memory in social recall. , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[7]  Less is more: The availability heuristic in early childhood. , 2015, The British journal of developmental psychology.

[8]  R. Milardo,et al.  Comparative Methods for Delineating Social Networks , 1992 .

[9]  Thorsten Pachur,et al.  How do people judge risks: availability heuristic, affect heuristic, or both? , 2012, Journal of experimental psychology. Applied.

[10]  Yoella Bereby-Meyer,et al.  Children's Choice Strategies: The Effects of Age and Task Demands. , 2004 .

[11]  Daniel Kahneman,et al.  Availability: A heuristic for judging frequency and probability , 1973 .

[12]  Martyn Plummer,et al.  JAGS: A program for analysis of Bayesian graphical models using Gibbs sampling , 2003 .

[13]  M. Lee,et al.  A Bayesian hierarchical mixture approach to individual differences: Case studies in selective attention and representation in category learning ☆ , 2014 .

[14]  D. Davidson,et al.  Children's decision-making examined with an information-board procedure☆ , 1991 .

[15]  J. Rieskamp The probabilistic nature of preferential choice. , 2008, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[16]  R. Nosofsky,et al.  A response-time approach to comparing generalized rational and take-the-best models of decision making. , 2007, Journal of experimental psychology. Learning, memory, and cognition.

[17]  Thorsten Pachur,et al.  Intuitive judgments of social statistics : How exhaustive does sampling need to be? , 2013 .