TY - JOUR
T1 - Counterfactual conditionals and false belief
T2 - A developmental dissociation
AU - Perner, Josef
AU - Sprung, Manuel
AU - Steinkogler, Bettina
N1 - Funding Information:
We would like to express our appreciation to the heads and children of the following kindergartens for their cooperation and valuable time participating in this project: Pfarrkindergärten Herrnau, Nonntal, Parsch; Gemeindekindergärten Radstadt, Ramsau, Eben, Flachau; Krabbelstuben Simsalabim I+II; Tageselternzentrum (TEZ); Fr. Dr. Schirl-Leitgeb. We are deeply ingratiated to Petra Zauner for her expert advice on the grammar of English and German. The project was financially supported by the Austrian Science Fund (project P14495-SPR).
PY - 2004/4
Y1 - 2004/4
N2 - The objective of this study was to explore factors that affect the difficulty of counterfactual reasoning in 3-5-year-old children and to shed light on the reason why counterfactual reasoning relates to understanding false belief [Cognitive Development, 13 (1998) 73-90]. Using travel scenarios, the difference between simple scenarios, in which each departure point led to exactly one destination, and complex scenarios, in which each of the departure points was cross-connected with all destination points, proved very important. In simple scenarios even 3 1/2-year olds gave 75% correct answers to counterfactual questions, a level achieved on complex scenarios a year, and on false belief questions, irrespective of scenario, 1 1/2 years later. Since simple scenarios require the same kind of reasoning as complex scenarios, this calls into question the suggestion by Peterson and Riggs [Mind & Language 14 (1999) 80-112] that modified derivation is the common denominator for answering counterfactual questions and questions about false belief.
AB - The objective of this study was to explore factors that affect the difficulty of counterfactual reasoning in 3-5-year-old children and to shed light on the reason why counterfactual reasoning relates to understanding false belief [Cognitive Development, 13 (1998) 73-90]. Using travel scenarios, the difference between simple scenarios, in which each departure point led to exactly one destination, and complex scenarios, in which each of the departure points was cross-connected with all destination points, proved very important. In simple scenarios even 3 1/2-year olds gave 75% correct answers to counterfactual questions, a level achieved on complex scenarios a year, and on false belief questions, irrespective of scenario, 1 1/2 years later. Since simple scenarios require the same kind of reasoning as complex scenarios, this calls into question the suggestion by Peterson and Riggs [Mind & Language 14 (1999) 80-112] that modified derivation is the common denominator for answering counterfactual questions and questions about false belief.
KW - Conditional reasoning
KW - Counterfactual conditionals
KW - False belief
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=2342435009&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.12.001
DO - 10.1016/j.cogdev.2003.12.001
M3 - Journal article
AN - SCOPUS:2342435009
SN - 0885-2014
VL - 19
SP - 179
EP - 201
JO - Cognitive Development
JF - Cognitive Development
IS - 2
ER -