It may seem like your baby leads a carefree life—he has devoted servants who feed him, clothe him, bathe him and entertain him—but make no mistake: His brain is working hard, and picking up a language with no formal instruction is not an easy task. Particularly in the early months of his word learning, the intense effort it takes his brain to acquire new words may lead him to confuse similar-sounding words. But that phase will soon pass, and he’ll enter into a phase where similar-sounding words are not only easy to distinguish but also delightful to the ear. (No wonder Dr. Seuss’s rhyming verses are so popular.) In the meantime, let your baby’s brain work at its own natural pace.
47
The Ambiguous “One”
Age range: 16–18 months
Experiment complexity: Moderate
Research area: Language development
THE EXPERIMENT
Conduct this experiment around the time when your baby begins using two-word phrases. By this point in their language development, babies have come to understand that words can be strung together according to certain grammar rules.
Gather two objects that differ in color but are of the same kind, such as two bottles, two rattles, or two balls. Show your baby one of the objects, and identify it. For instance, you might say, “Look! A yellow ball.” Repeat this presentation once or twice, then remove the object from view. Next, display both objects at the same time, one in your left hand and one in your right hand. Say, “Now look. Do you see another one?” Make note of which object he looks at, and for how long.
THE HYPOTHESIS
Your baby will look longer at the object you presented earlier.
THE RESEARCH
This is one of those experiments for which the hypothesis seems pretty simple and obvious, but it has intriguing and wide-reaching implications for language-development researchers.
First, some background: In the 1950s and 1960s, now-legendary linguist Noam Chomsky formulated theories about how language is structured, how we comprehend it, and how we come to acquire it. He argued that certain rules of language are hardwired into the human brain—that is, they are not simply acquired through experience. Detractors argue that children can pick up everything they need to know about language from the speech they hear around them.
In a 2003 study, three language-development researchers devised an experiment to test whether babies are able to pick up on an aspect of English grammar that, they argue, the babies could not have learned simply by listening to speech in their environment because it doesn’t occur frequently enough. They presented an object that was described with an adjective-noun phrase (yellow ball). Then, they presented two objects, both of which fit the noun (ball) but only one of which matched the adjective-noun phrase. They asked the babies, “Do you see another one?”
The researchers argued that if the babies understood one to refer to only the noun, they would not show a preference for either of the two objects because both matched the noun. But if they understood one to refer to the adjective-noun phrase, as adults do, they would show a preference for the object that matched that phrase. As it turns out, the babies did show a preference for the object that matched the adjective-noun phrase.
This finding lends support to the idea that this particular language rule is innate, rather than acquired, knowledge. It’s a big win for Chomsky lovers.
THE TAKEAWAY
Chomsky wasn’t the first to argue that we’re born with innate knowledge. Great philosophers like Plato, Descartes, and Leibniz also put forth variations on the idea. (Another great philosopher, John Locke, famously disagreed, arguing that the mind begins as a tabula rasa, or clean slate.) But Chomsky certainly did set off an explosion of research in the field of child development that deals with whether some knowledge is innate rather than acquired. Over the past several decades, studies have shown that babies appear to have an inborn concept of not only grammar but also rudimentary mathematics and physics. These core concepts that are prewired in your baby enhance his ability to make sense of the world. So in your daily interactions with him, don’t hesitate to expose him to unfamiliar words, actions, and situations. They may not be so unfamiliar after all.
48
Helping the Helper
Age range: 18–24 months
Experiment complexity: Moderate
Research area: Social development and behavioral development
THE EXPERIMENT
Enlist the help of two adult friends. Have one friend show your toddler a toy and express interest in it, then offer the toy to the toddler—but tell the friend to “accidentally” drop the toy in such a way that the child can’t access it (for example, behind a barrier). The other friend should also show the toddler a toy and express interest in it, but after offering the toy to the toddler, have her smile, say “Never mind,” and put the toy away. Finally, put a new toy in front of your toddler and have both friends put their hands out and request it.
THE HYPOTHESIS
Your toddler is more likely to assist the friend who was willing but unable to give her the toy, as opposed to the friend who was able but not willing to give her the toy.
THE RESEARCH
In a 2010 experiment, 24 toddlers, all about 21 months old, stood behind a table with their parents behind them. Two women (hired actresses) stood on the other end of the table and offered the children a toy—but one withdrew the toy, while the other dropped it and acted as if it were lost. When the children were then given a toy, and both women reached for it, two-thirds of the children handed the toy to the woman who had unsuccessfully tried to give them a toy; the other eight kept the toy for themselves. Not a single child gave the toy to the woman who had offered a toy and then retracted the offer.
The experiment suggests that children, even at the earliest stages of helping behavior, are selective in how they choose to help; that reciprocation (helping those who have previously helped you) is at play in this selective behavior; and that toddlers take into account the intent of an attempted helpful action, even if the attempt is unsuccessful.
Indeed, a related experiment suggests that toddlers ascribe the same weight to an unsuccessful attempt at help as to a successful attempt. In this experiment, one woman tried unsuccessfully to give the child a toy, and the other successfully gave the child a toy. Then the child was given a toy, and both women requested it. The researchers noted that 16 out of 21 toddlers gave the toy to one of the women, and of those, half gave it to the woman who unsuccessfully tried to help, and the other half gave it to the one who successfully helped—suggesting that what matters more when children consider helping behavior is the intent, rather than the results.
THE TAKEAWAY
Even at your baby’s young age, she’s not indiscriminate about whom she helps. Her decision may not be tactical (that is, helping the person who’s more likely to come to her aid in the future) but it is definitely intentional: She rewards those who have helped her over those who haven’t. Because this aspect of her social development helps her distinguish friends from adversaries, encourage older siblings to find ways to help her reach her goals, such as by helping her obtain a toy that’s out of reach. It’s a great way to strengthen the bond between them.
49
Punishing the Bad Guy
Age range: 19–23 months
Experiment complexity: Complex
Research area: Social development and emotional development
THE EXPERIMENT
Gather or construct three distinct-looking hand puppets. You’ll also need a small ball and a handful of Cheerios or other similar cereal.
Introduce your child to the three puppets and ask him to feed some Cheerios to each puppet. The puppet should nibble on the Cheerios and respond as if the cereal was very tasty. Next, tell him that you’re going to perform a puppet show. Act out the following scene: One puppet plays with a ball. The puppet drops the ball. Another puppet comes by, picks up the ball, and
gives it back to the first puppet. The puppet drops the ball again. The third puppet comes by, picks up the ball, and runs away with it.
Finally, show your child the helper puppet (who returned the ball to its owner) and the hinderer puppet (who ran away with the ball). Say that there’s only one Cheerio left, and allow him to choose which of the two puppets to give it to.
THE HYPOTHESIS
Your baby is extremely likely to give the final Cheerio to the helper puppet, rather than the hinderer puppet.
THE RESEARCH
In a 2011 study involving toddlers between 19 and 23 months, the researchers acted out a short puppet show with these scenarios. The toddlers were then given the opportunity to reward either the helper or hinderer with a piece of food. They overwhelmingly chose to reward the helper. Moreover, when they were given the chance to take away a piece of food from either the helper or the hinderer, they overwhelmingly chose to take the food away from the hinderer.
The results of this study show that by around the end of the first year, babies have moral intuitions that closely mirror those of adults: They prefer to reward those who display positive social behavior and punish those who display negative social behavior.
THE TAKEAWAY
The results of this study suggest that even before their first birthday, babies have a rudimentary sense of right and wrong. Granted, they won’t always act like they care about right and wrong, but at least they are able to recognize it when they see it. An opportune moment to help your child better understand the moral principles that underpin an action is when you are praising him for good behavior or correcting him for bad behavior. For instance, if he has shared a toy, you might point out that sharing is good because it shows others that you care for them and want them to be happy. Conversely, if he has thrown a toy, you might point out that throwing toys is wrong because it could hurt someone and because it does not show that he appreciates what he has.
50
Don’t You Know?
Age range: 24 months
Experiment complexity: Moderate
Research area: Social development and cognitive development
THE EXPERIMENT
Gather three objects, each distinct in appearance, that are unfamiliar to your toddler but safe to play with (such as an empty wallet, a water bottle, or a ball of yarn). Have a friend join you and your toddler at a table. Present the first object, and have your friend express interest in it, using phrases like, “Look at that!” and “Isn’t that neat?” Allow your toddler to play with the object for about 30 seconds. Then put away the first object and present the second object. Your friend should again express interest in it, and you should again let your toddler play with it for about 30 seconds. Now, put away the second object. At this point, your friend should turn his chair so he’s facing away from the table and unable to see it. Now, present the third object. Your friend should remain silent and should not turn around or look at the object. Let your toddler play with the third object for about 30 seconds, then put it away. After a brief pause, place all three objects on the table. At this point, your friend should turn his chair back around and say, without looking directly at any of the toys, “Wow, look! I don’t know that one yet. Can you give it to me, please?” Make note of which object your toddler gives him.
THE HYPOTHESIS
The third object is the only one of the three that your friend did not see. But your toddler is unlikely to be able to identify it as the object that your friend doesn’t know yet.
THE RESEARCH
In a 2010 study, 24-month-olds were shown three objects in succession. With the first two objects, an experimenter sat nearby and expressed interest in the objects. Before the third object was presented, some of the toddlers saw the experimenter get up and leave the room. Others saw a divider placed near the experimenter, blocking her ability to view the object. She nevertheless expressed interest in the object, despite not being able to see it. In the group in which the experimenter left the room, nearly two-thirds correctly identified the third object as the one the experimenter was referring to when she said, “I don’t know that one yet.” In contrast, in the group in which the experimenter remained nearby, fewer than one-third (less than chance) gave the third object to the experimenter.
The researchers say the results of this study show that when young children are socially engaged with a person and the person remains in proximity, they tend to operate as if that person occupies the same “perceptual space.” In other words, they assume that if they can perceive an object, the other person can also perceive it.
The social engagement aspect of the experiment appears to be key to this illusion of occupying the same perceptual space because an earlier experiment showed that babies as young as 12 months old are able to realize that an adult sitting across from them cannot necessarily see the same things as them.
THE TAKEAWAY
By age 2, your toddler is able to do all sorts of things. The number of words he can understand is vast, he is able to follow simple requests, and he’s well on his way to being able to take off all his own clothes and go streaking. But the results of this experiment show that he’s still prone to certain perceptual misunderstandings, particularly when he is socially engaged with someone. In a way, though, you should feel flattered: Your interaction with your child is so interesting to him that it leads him to overlook or misunderstand things he otherwise wouldn’t. Your toddler will get better at this over time, without much need for active coaching, but in the meantime, be aware that your child may not be able to make perceptual space determinations with accuracy.
Don’t Try This at Home
There are a few famous infant experiments that are really cool, but not DIY-friendly. One such experiment is called the Visual Cliff, which is intended to test depth perception. The apparatus used during the experiment is a raised platform with a patterned (often checkerboard) surface. In the middle of the platform, there is a clear plexiglass “bridge” that crosses over a “valley” with the same pattern as that on the platform. Babies are placed on the platform and prompted to crawl over the bridge. Research since the 1960s has shown that newly crawling infants tend to cross the Visual Cliff without hesitation, but those who have some crawling—and falling—experience tend to hesitate or refuse, which suggests that they have perceived the vertical drop-off and fear falling into it. Of course, the clear plexiglass will prevent them from falling, but that’s not plainly obvious to the babies, so they stay away from the ledge.
APPENDIX A
Projects by Complexity
SIMPLE
1. Soothing Scents
2. Baby Blueprints
3. En Garde
4. Happy Feet
7. Response Under Pressure
8. I’m Hip to That
9. This Little Piggy Was Named Babinski
13. Tongue Testing
16. Spider Sense
21. Body Stretches
24. The Gestation of Gestures
25. Sizing Things Up
26. Mirror, Mirror
28. Grabby Hands
29. I Want What You Want
31. The In-Plain-Sight Switcheroo
33. The Importance of an Audience
34. A Gazy Connection
37. Defending What’s Mine
41. The Retriever
MODERATE
5. A Penchant for Patterns
6. Feet Lead the Way
10. A Memorable Smile
11. Out on a Limb
12. Grasping Prep
14. Picture: Impossible
15. Pitch Patterns
18. The Face Matches the Feeling
19. Stress Busting
22. A Cappella Strikes a Chord
23. Natural Interference
27. Capturing the Cup
30. Be Still, My Face
; 35. Shapes or Kinds?
36. Demonstration and Deduction
38. Taking Cues
39. Walking Tour
40. Familiarity and Foods
42. I Know Something You Don’t Know
43. Using Your Head
44. A Questioning Look
46. Same or Similar?
47. The Ambiguous “One”
48. Helping the Helper
50. Don’t You Know?
COMPLEX
17. Put an Age to That Face
20. Propulsive Perceptions
32. The Goldilocks Effect
45. Power Napping
49. Punishing the Bad Guy
APPENDIX B
Projects by Research Area
BEHAVIORAL DEVELOPMENT
48. Helping the Helper
COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
2. Baby Blueprints
5. A Penchant for Patterns
14. Picture: Impossible
16. Spider Sense
17. Put an Age to That Face
21. Body Stretches
26. Mirror, Mirror
27. Capturing the Cup
31. The In-Plain-Sight Switcheroo
32. The Goldilocks Effect
36. Demonstration and Deduction
42. I Know Something You Don’t Know
44. A Questioning Look
Experimenting with Babies Page 11
