Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2019 Jan;11(1):136-153.
doi: 10.1111/tops.12389. Epub 2018 Oct 15.

Violations of Core Knowledge Shape Early Learning

Affiliations
Review

Violations of Core Knowledge Shape Early Learning

Aimee E Stahl et al. Top Cogn Sci. 2019 Jan.

Abstract

Research on cognitive development has revealed that even the youngest minds detect and respond to events that adults find surprising. These surprise responses suggest that infants have a basic set of "core" expectations about the world that are shared with adults and other species. However, little work has asked what purpose these surprise responses serve. Here we discuss recent evidence that violations of core knowledge offer special opportunities for learning. Infants and young children make predictions about the world on the basis of their core knowledge of objects, quantities, and social entities. We argue that when these predictions fail to match the observed data, infants and children experience an enhanced drive to seek and retain new information. This impact of surprise on learning is not equipotent. Instead, it is directed to entities that are relevant to the surprise itself; this drive propels children-even infants-to form and test new hypotheses about surprising aspects of the world. We briefly consider similarities and differences between these recent findings with infants and children, on the one hand, and findings on prediction errors in humans and non-human animals, on the other. These comparisons raise open questions that require continued inquiry, but suggest that considering phenomena across species, ages, kinds of surprise, and types of learning will ultimately help to clarify how surprise shapes thought.

Keywords: Children; Expectations; Infants; Learning; Object knowledge; Surprise.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Abler B, Walter H, Erk S, Kammerer H, & Spitzer M (2006). Prediction error as a linear function of reward probability is coded in human nucleus accumbens. Neuroimage, 31, 790–795. - PubMed
    1. Adler JE (2008). Surprise. Educational Theory, 58, 149–173.
    1. Agrillo C, Dadda M, Serena G, & Bisazza A (2008). Do fish count? Spontaneous discrimination of quantity in female mosquitofish. Animal Cognition, 11, 495–503. - PubMed
    1. Baillargeon R (2004). Infants’ physical world. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13, 89–94.
    1. Baillargeon R & Hanko-Summers S (1990). Is the top object adequately supported by the bottom object? Young infants’ understanding of support relations. Cognitive Development, 5, 29–53.

Publication types