Anthropomorphic explanations appear in older children but less frequently, with only a minority of 14-year-olds' fuse explanations anthropomorphic¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study · theoretical r2 · q2
Currency · newest study 1991 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person · overdue for a recheck since 1996: baselines and conditions change
Evidence quality · No study behind this claim is a peer-reviewed article with a DOI: it rests on an ERIC document (a report, conference paper or thesis). It is kept because a design page cites it; treat it as a lead to check, not an established finding.

Subclaims¶

q2 i? Anthropomorphic explanations were present in older children but less frequently; of the 14-year-olds' fuse explanations quoted, only Kim's was anthropomorphic. → Watts 1991

Evidence¶

Watts 1991¶

Watts, Mike; Bentley, Di. (1991). An Instructional 'Mali-Trap': Anthropomorphic and Animistic Thought in Constructivist Science Education. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED336269

q2 · i? · theoretical · r2

In the authors' classroom data, 14-year-olds learning about fuses gave mostly mechanistic explanations (hot wires melting, electricity scorching), with only Kim's 'excited' electricity anthropomorphic. The authors state anthropomorphic explanations were "present in older children, butless frequently".

"Likeotherstudies,wealsofoundthat 151 6 anthropomorphicexpl:Inationswerepresent in older children, butless frequently."

Discussion¶

Learner Variables¶

• Age and Developmental Stage — predictor: learners who differ on it differ in outcomes

Related Claims¶

• Animistic and anthropomorphic explanations do not diminish with age but survive into adulthood, contrary to the Piagetian stage account — reports the opposite
• Seven-year-olds' classroom talk shows animistic explanations linking flames, plants and floating objects to human needs and feelings — related
• Students' teleologic explanations and anthropomorphic languages correlate with age and are associated with curricular undertaking — reports the opposite
• DD children's deficit in non-symbolic number magnitude processing appears only in studies of older children (10 years and above), not younger ones — related
• Age may moderate acute PA effects on attention: effects appeared for 9–10 year olds but not 7–8 year olds — related
• A single bout of closed-skill exercise improves short-term memory performance only in older primary-school children (9–10 years), not in 7–8-year-olds. — related