(Re)Inventing the wheel: the development of tool innovation.

（重新）发明轮子：工具创新的发展。

• 批准号: ES/J023485/1
• 负责人: Sarah Beck
• 金额: $ 40.03万
• 依托单位: University of Birmingham
• 依托单位国家: 英国
• 项目类别: Research Grant
• 财政年份: 2012
• 资助国家: 英国
• 起止时间: 2012 至 无数据
• 项目状态: 已结题
• 来源: https://gtr.ukri.org/projects?ref=ES%2FJ023485%2F1
• 关键词: Re; Inventing; wheel; development; tool

Humans use tools in all aspects of our lives. Reading this you are benefitting from a printer or electronic display, perhaps you are using glasses to see, and a mug to hold your coffee. A wealth of research charts the emergence of tools in human evolution, tool use in non-human animals, and human children's readiness to learn from others how to use tools. Most tools that humans use are not found in the environment. They have been made by people. We ask what makes humans such prolific innovators of tools? Tool-innovation has received limited attention in the comparative literature, but ours is the first study of human tool-innovation.Our goal is to understand the psychological processes involved in tool-innovation. We look at a group whose cognitive processes are still in development and who find it remarkably difficult to innovate tools: human children. In our pioneering work on children's tool-innovation we gave children a simple physical problem: a bucket containing a sticker needed to be retrieved from the bottom of a tall, transparent, vertical tube. Crows have solved variants of this task by bending wire in to a hook to retrieve the bucket. We expected children to easily fashion a hook from a straight pipecleaner to solve the task, given their expertise using pre-made tools in everyday life. To our surprise 3- to 5-year-olds rarely innovated a hook, and it was only at 8 years that the majority of children succeeded. We confirmed the generalisability of our finding and now ask: Why is tool-innovation so difficult for human children?Two strands of research address this. In one we test if children lack competence in the domain of physical cognition. Perhaps children lack understanding of causation (e.g. how tools interact with the world), materials (that pipecleaners are pliable, although our results are not limited to tasks involving pipecleaners!), or transformation (that actions can reshape objects). In the other strand we consider whether children who possess the requisite causal knowledge are prevented from using it by performance demands, either immature executive function (e.g. they may respond impulsively or be unable to switch strategies once begun) or an adaptation to learn from others.We will conduct one large individual differences study where we test many participants on a wide range of measures, followed by 9 experimental studies where we manipulate the tasks to understand the cognitive processes more precisely. The former takes fine grained measures of behaviour and looks for relationships with executive function, general intelligence, and language ability. Our experiments explore whether children lack causal information about the solution or the transformation needed (competence) and we manipulate the opportunities for impulsivity and strategy switching, and the social context (performance). While our main focus is development, we also explore adults' innovation and the nature of innovation itself. Adults' innovation is addressed experimentally e.g. do adults prefer to adapt pre-made tools rather than innovate new ones, are they impulsive in their strategy choices? The nature of innovation is the topic of an associated PhD examining the relationship between tool- and other types of innovation.Our research will have substantial interdisciplinary impact (we have already published in general journals: Cognition, Behavioral & Brain Sciences) as well as in developmental, comparative and cognitive psychology. Furthermore, the research has great potential for bidirectional public engagement - through our partnership with the Birmingham Thinktank museum we will promote our findings to the public and discuss plans with parents and children: we expect to benefit from their suggestions for experimental tasks and everyday evidence of innovation. Furthermore, understanding innovation as a cognitive process should improve the efficiency with which society innovates and how we encourage young people's innovation.

人类在生活的各个方面都使用工具。阅读这篇文章，你正在受益于打印机或电子显示器，也许你正在使用眼镜来看东西，用马克杯来装咖啡。大量的研究图表工具在人类进化中的出现，非人类动物的工具使用，以及人类儿童向他人学习如何使用工具的准备。人类使用的大多数工具在环境中找不到。它们是由人制造的。我们要问，是什么让人类成为如此多产的工具创新者？工具创新在比较文学中受到的关注有限，但我们是第一次对人类工具创新进行研究，我们的目标是了解工具创新所涉及的心理过程。我们研究的是一个认知过程仍在发展中的群体，他们发现创新工具非常困难：人类儿童。在我们对儿童工具创新的开创性工作中，我们给了孩子们一个简单的物理问题：需要从一个高的透明垂直管的底部取出一个装有贴纸的桶。乌鸦已经解决了这个任务的变体，通过弯曲金属丝到钩子上来取回水桶。我们希望孩子们能很容易地从一个直的管道清洁器中制作一个钩子来解决这个问题，因为他们在日常生活中使用预制工具的专业知识。令我们惊讶的是，3到5岁的孩子很少会发明一个钩子，只有在8岁的时候，大多数孩子才成功。我们证实了我们发现的普遍性，现在问：为什么工具创新对人类儿童来说如此困难？有两种研究可以解决这个问题。在一个测试中，我们测试儿童是否缺乏物理认知领域的能力。也许孩子们缺乏对因果关系的理解（例如，工具如何与世界互动），材料（管道清洁工是柔韧的，尽管我们的结果并不限于涉及管道清洁工的任务！），或变换（动作可以重塑对象）。在另一个方面，我们考虑是否儿童谁拥有必要的因果知识是阻止使用它的性能要求，或不成熟的执行功能，（例如，他们可能会冲动地做出反应，或者一旦开始就无法转换策略）或适应向他人学习。我们将进行一项大的个体差异研究，我们将对许多参与者进行广泛的测量，接下来是9项实验研究，我们操纵任务以更精确地理解认知过程。前者采取精细的行为措施，并寻找与执行功能，一般智力和语言能力的关系。我们的实验探讨了儿童是否缺乏关于解决方案或所需转换（能力）的因果信息，我们操纵冲动和策略转换的机会，以及社会背景（表现）。虽然我们的主要重点是发展，我们也探索成人的创新和创新本身的性质。成年人的创新是实验性的，例如，成年人更喜欢适应预制工具，而不是创新新的，他们在他们的战略选择冲动？创新的本质是一个相关博士研究工具和其他类型的创新之间的关系的主题。我们的研究将产生重大的跨学科影响（我们已经在一般期刊上发表：认知，行为和脑科学）以及发展，比较和认知心理学。此外，这项研究具有双向公众参与的巨大潜力-通过我们与伯明翰智库博物馆的合作，我们将向公众推广我们的研究结果，并与父母和孩子讨论计划：我们希望从他们对实验任务和日常创新证据的建议中受益。此外，将创新理解为一种认知过程，应能提高社会创新的效率，以及我们鼓励年轻人创新的方式。

项目成果

Is tool modification more difficult than innovation?

工具修改比创新更困难吗？

• DOI: 10.1016/j.cogdev.2019.100811
• 发表时间: 2019
• 期刊: Cognitive Development
• 影响因子: 1.8
• 作者: Cutting N

Young children copy cumulative technological design in the absence of action information.

• DOI: 10.1038/s41598-017-01715-2
• 发表时间: 2017-05-11
• 期刊: Scientific reports
• 影响因子: 4.6
• 作者: Reindl E;Apperly IA;Beck SR;Tennie C
• 通讯作者: Tennie C

Young children spontaneously invent wild great apes' tool-use behaviours.

• DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2015.2402
• 发表时间: 2016-02-24
• 期刊: Proceedings. Biological sciences
• 作者: Reindl E;Beck SR;Apperly IA;Tennie C
• 通讯作者: Tennie C

The development of tool manufacture in humans: what helps young children make innovative tools?

• DOI: 10.1098/rstb.2012.0409
• 发表时间: 2013-11-19
• 期刊: PHILOSOPHICAL TRANSACTIONS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY B-BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
• 影响因子: 6.3
• 作者: Chappell, Jackie;Cutting, Nicola;Beck, Sarah R.
• 通讯作者: Beck, Sarah R.

Is tool-making knowledge robust over time and across problems?

• DOI: 10.3389/fpsyg.2014.01395
• 发表时间: 2014
• 期刊: Frontiers in psychology
• 影响因子: 3.8
• 作者: Beck SR;Cutting N;Apperly IA;Demery Z;Iliffe L;Rishi S;Chappell J
• 通讯作者: Chappell J