Can object exploration or explanation-generation facilitate innovative problem-solving in 5–7-year-olds
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 9406702 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Darcy Neilson (York St John University, corresponding author), Nicola Cutting (0000-0002-3155-9566, York St John University), Emma C Tecwyn (0000-0002-2343-2282, York St John University) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Volume | 264 |
| Pages | 106396-106396 |
| Publication date | 2026-02-06 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Acta Psychologica (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0001-6918 • E-ISSN: 1873-6297 |
| Publisher | Elsevier BV (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1016/j.actpsy.2026.106396 |
| PMID | 41653766 |
| OpenAlex | W7128172564 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 67 |
Children struggle with independently innovating solutions to physical problems until around 8-years-old. This pre-registered study tested whether encouraging 5-7-year-olds (N = 83) to (1) explore task materials or (2) generate explanations would support innovative problem-solving in two tasks that involved accessing an out-of-reach item (the hook task and water-displacement task). Children were assigned to one of three conditions (Explore, Explain, Baseline). In the pre-test phase children were prompted to: (1) explore task materials (the functional and non-functional items presented alongside each task), (2) explain how the materials could be used to problem solve, or (3) complete a filler task, respectively. During the test phase of the Explain condition the experimenter used verbal prompts (e.g., "Why did that happen when you did that?") to elicit explanations from children. These were matched with neutral "report" prompts ("What happened when you did that?") in the Explore and Baseline groups. Overall success rates were 48.2% (hook task) and 59% (water-displacement task), but there were no significant differences between conditions in success, whether children used the functional item first, or time to success. These findings indicate that neither the Explore nor the Explain manipulations used in the current study facilitated children's problem-solving performance. Exploratory analyses suggested that, regardless of condition, object manipulations, independent discoveries, and iterative tool refinement were associated with success on the hook task. Analyses of children's verbal utterances revealed an association between cognitive speech and success on the hook task. Taken together, these findings suggest that self-directed exploration and task engagement, rather than externally prompted efforts, supported problem-solving success
Association (psychology · Baseline (sea · Cognition · Hook · Object (grammar · Task (project management · Task Analysis · Child and Animal Learning Development · Science Education and Pedagogy · Visual and Cognitive Learning Processes
Bayesian inference for psychology. Part I
Boris
The double-edged sword of pedagogy
Imitation and Innovation
Bayesian data analysis for newcomers
Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work
A functional approach to explanation-seeking curiosity
Explanation impacts hypothesis generation, but not evaluation, during learning
Inquiring Systems and Problem Structure
Planning in young children
I think I can
The Motivational Function of Preschoolers' Private Speech
One- and two-year-olds grasp that causes must precede their effects
Serious fun
Tinkering to innovation
Creation across culture
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |