Skip to main content
Log in

Young Children’s Reasoning About Physical & Behavioural Family Resemblance: Is There a Place for a Precursor Model of Inheritance?

  • Published:
Science & Education Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper aims at exploring (a) whether preschoolers recognize that offspring share physical traits with their parents due to birth and behavioural ones due to nurture, and (b) whether they seem ready to explain shared physical traits with a ‘pre-biological’ causal model that includes the contribution of both parents and a rudimentary notion of genes. This exploration is supposed to provide evidence for our next step, which is the development of an early years’ learning environment about inheritance. Conducting individual, semi-structured interviews with 90 preschoolers (age 4.5–5.5) of four public kindergartens in Patras, we attempted to trace their reasoning about (a) whether and why offspring share physical and behavioural traits with parents and (b) which mechanism could better explain the shared physical traits. The probes were a modified six-case version of Solomon et al. (Child Dev 67:151–171, 1996) ‘adoption task, as well as a three-case task based on Springer’s (Child Dev 66:547–558, 1995) ‘mechanism task’ and on Solomon and Johnson’s (Br J Dev Psychol 18(1):81–96, 2000) idea of genes as a ‘conceptual placeholder’. The qualitative and quantitative analysis of the interviews showed overlapping reasoning about the origin of physical and behavioural family resemblance. Nevertheless, we did trace the ‘birth-driven’ argument for the attribution of the offspring’s physical traits to the biological parents, as well as a preference for the ‘pre-biological’ model that introduces a rudimentary idea of genes in order to explain shared physical traits between parents and offspring. The findings of the study and the educational implications are thoroughly discussed.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Carey (1995), Gimenez and Harris (2002), Inagaki and Hatano (2006), Keil (1994), Legare et al. (2009), Taylor et al. (2009), Wellman and Gelman (1992).

  2. Ergazaki et al. (2009, 2010), Williams and Tolmie (2000), Williams and Binnie (2002), Zogza and Papamichael (2000).

  3. Schroeder et al. (2007), Solomon and Johnson (2000), Springer (1995), Williams and Affleck (1999).

  4. Carey (1995), Gelman and Wellman (1991), Hirschfeld (1994), Johnson and Solomon (1997), Keil (1994), Solomon et al. (1996), Solomon (2002), Springer and Keil (1991), Springer (1992, 1996).

References

  • Astuti, R., Solomon, G. E. A., & Carey, S. (Eds.). (2004). Constraints on conceptual development (Vol. 69). Boston, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bonawitz, E., Fischer, A., & Schulz, L. (2012). Teaching 3.5-year-olds to revise their beliefs given ambiguous evidence. Journal of Cognition and Development, 13(2), 266–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carey, S. (1995). On the origin of causal understanding. In D. Sperber, D. Premack, & A. J. Premack (Eds.), Causal cognition: A multidisciplinary debate (pp. 268–302). Oxford, UK: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Condit, M. C., Ofulue, N., & Sheedy, M. K. (1998). Determinism and mass-media portrayals of genetics. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 62(4), 979–984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ergazaki, M., Saltapida, K., & Zogza, V. (2010). From young children’s ideas about germs to ideas shaping a learning environment. Research in Science Education, 40(5), 699–715.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ergazaki, M., Zogza, V., & Grekou, A. (2009). From preschoolers’ ideas about decomposition, domestic garbage fate and recycling to the objectives of a constructivist learning environment in this context. Review of Science, Mathematics and ICT Education, 3(1), 99–121.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, S. A. (2009). Essentialist reasoning about the biological world. In A. Berthoz & Y. Christen (Eds.), Neurobiology of “Umwelt”: How living beings perceive the World (pp. 7–16). Berlin, Germany: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, S. A., Collman, P., & Maccoby, E. E. (1986). Inferring properties from categories versus inferring categories from properties: The case of gender. Child Development, 57(2), 396–404.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gelman, S. A., & Wellman, H. M. (1991). Insides and essences: Early understandings of the non obvious. Cognition, 38, 213–244.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gimenez, M., & Harris, P. L. (2002). Understanding constraints on inheritance: Evidence for biological thinking in early childhood. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 307–324.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hirschfeld, L. A. (1994). The child’s representation of human groups. In D. Medin (Ed.), The psychology of learning and motivation: Advances in research and theory (Vol. 31, pp. 133–183). San Diego: Academic Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Inagaki, K., & Hatano, G. (2006). Young children’s conception of the biological world. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15(4), 177–181.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, S. C., & Solomon, G. E. A. (1997). Why dogs have puppies and cats have kittens: The role of birth in young children’s understanding of biological origins. Child Development, 68(3), 404–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keil, F. (1994). The birth and nurturance of concepts by domains: The origins of concepts of living things. In L. A. Hirsschfeld & S. A. Gelman (Eds.), Mapping the mind: Domain specificity in cognition and culture (pp. 234–254). New York: Cambridge University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Legare, C. H., Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Evidence for an explanation advantage in naïve biological reasoning. Cognitive Psychology, 58, 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, R. J., & Gilbert, J. K. (1980). A technique for exploring children’s views of the world (1980). Physics Education, 15, 376–379.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Osborne, J., Wadsworth, P., & Black, P. (1982). Processes of life: Primary space project research report. Liverpool, England: Liverpool University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pontecorvo, C., & Girardet, H. (1993). Arguing and reasoning in understanding historical topics. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3&4), 365–395.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Resnick, L., Salmon, M., Zeitz, C., Wathen, S. H., & Holowchak, M. (1993). Reasoning in Conversation. Cognition and Instruction, 11(3&4), 347–364.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schroeder, M., McKeough, A., Graham, S., Stock, H., & Palmer, J. (2007). Teaching preschoolers about inheritance. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 5(1), 64–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schulz, L., Bonawitz, E. B., & Griffiths, T. (2007). Can being scared make your tummy ache? Naive theories, ambiguous evidence, and preschoolers’ causal inferences. Developmental Psychology, 43, 1124–1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, G. E. A. (2002). Birth, kind and naïve biology. Developmental Science, 5, 213–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, G. E. A., & Johnson, S. C. (2000). Conceptual change in the classroom: Teaching young children to understand biological inheritance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18(1), 81–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Solomon, G. E. A., Johnson, S. C., Zaitchic, D., & Carey, S. (1996). Like father, like son: Young children’s understanding of how and why offspring resemble their parents. Child Development, 67, 151–171.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sousa, P., Atran, S., & Medin, D. (2002). Essentialism and folkbiology: Evidence from Brazil. Journal of Cognition and Culture, 2, 195–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, K. (1992). Children’s awareness of the biological implications of kinship. Child Development, 63, 950–959.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, K. (1995). Acquiring a naïve theory of kinship through inference. Child Development, 66, 547–558.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, K. (1996). Young children’s understanding of a biological basis for parent–offspring relations. Child Development, 67, 2841–2856.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, K., & Keil, F. C. (1989). On the development of biologically specific beliefs: The case of inheritance. Child Development, 60, 637–648.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Springer, K., & Keil, F. C. (1991). Early differentiation of causal mechanisms appropriate to biological and non biological kinds. Child Development, 62, 767–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, M. G., Rhodes, M., & Gelman, S. A. (2009). Boys will be boys; Cows will be cows: Children’s essentialist reasoning about gender categories and animal species. Child Development, 80, 461–481.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Terwogt, M. M., Stegge, H., & Rieffe, C. (2003). Children’s understanding of inherited resemblance: The case of two parents. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 27(4), 366–374.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tunnicliffe, S. D., & Reiss, M. J. (1999). Building a model of the environment: How do children see animals? Journal of Biological Education, 33, 142–148.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weissman, M. D., & Kalish, C. W. (1999). The inheritance of desired characteristics: Children’s view of the role of intention in parent–offspring resemblance. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 73, 245–265.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wellman, H. M., & Gelman, S. A. (1992). Cognitive development: Foundational theories of core domains. Annual Review of Psychology, 43, 337–375.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. M., & Affleck, G. (1999). The effects of an age-appropriate intervention on young children’s understanding of inheritance. Educational Psychology, 19(3), 259–275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. M., & Binnie, L. M. (2002). Children’s concepts of illness: An intervention to improve knowledge. British Journal of Health Psychology, 7(2), 129–147.

    Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. M., & Smith, L. A. (2006). Social and experiential influences on the development of inheritance concepts. International Journal of Behavioural Development, 30(2), 148–157.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams, J. M., & Tolmie, A. (2000). Conceptual change in biology: Group conceptual change in biology: Group interaction and the understanding of inheritance. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 18, 625–649.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zogza, V., & Papamichael, Y. (2000). The development of the concept of alive by preschoolers through a cognitive conflict teaching intervention. European Journal of Psychology of Education, 15(2), 191–205.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank the young learners who participated in the study and also their teachers and parents who made this participation possible.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Marida Ergazaki.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Ergazaki, M., Alexaki, A., Papadopoulou, C. et al. Young Children’s Reasoning About Physical & Behavioural Family Resemblance: Is There a Place for a Precursor Model of Inheritance?. Sci & Educ 23, 303–323 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9594-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11191-013-9594-5

Keywords

Navigation