The roles of perspective and language in children's ability to delay gratification.

Increasing psychological distance is an established method for improving children's performance in a number of self-regulation tasks. For example, using a delay of gratification (DoG) task, Prencipe and Zelazo (Psychological Science, 2005, Vol. 16, pp. 501-505) showed that 3-year-olds delay more for "other" than they do for "self," whereas 4-year-olds make similar choices for self and other. However, to our knowledge, no work has manipulated language to increase psychological distance in children. In two experiments, we sought to manipulate psychological distance by replicating Prencipe and Zelazo's age-related findings and extending them to older children (Experiment 1) and also sought to manipulate psychological distance using the auxiliary verbs "want" and "should" to prime more impulsive preference-based decisions or more normative optimal decisions (Experiment 2). In Experiment 1, 96 3- to 7-year-olds showed age-related improvements and interactive effects between age and perspective on DoG performance. In Experiment 2, 132 3- to 7-year-olds showed age-related improvements and a marginal interaction between age and perspective on DoG performance, but no effect of auxiliary verbs was detected. Results are discussed in terms of differing developmental trajectories of DoG for self and other due to psychological distancing, and how taking another's perspective may boost DoG in younger children but not older children.

Two facets of patience in young children: Waiting with and without an explicit reward.

Patience, or the ability to tolerate delay, is typically studied using delay of gratification (DoG) tasks. However, among other factors (e.g., type of reward), the use of a reward to test patience is affected by an individual's motivation to obtain the reward (e.g., degree of preference for the small vs. large reward). In addition, DoG tasks do not assess the extent to which an individual can wait in the absence of an explicit reward-or what we term "patience as a virtue." Accordingly, the current study used a new measure of patience-the "pure waiting paradigm"-in which 3- to 5-year-old children waited 3 min with nothing to do and with no explicit reward. We then examined the relation between performance on this task (as assessed by children's spontaneous patient behaviors) and performance on two DoG tasks (candy and video rewards). Significant correlations were found between DoG performance and patient behaviors in the pure waiting paradigm, especially when controlling for motivation. These results and methodology show for the first time a direct link between patience as a virtue and DoG performance and also provide new insights about the study of patience in children.

'Things aren't so bad!': Preschoolers overpredict the emotional intensity of negative outcomes.

Adults often overpredict the emotional intensity of future events, but little is known about whether this 'intensity bias' is present in early childhood. We asked 48 3- to 5-year-olds to (1) predict and (2) report their emotions concerning two desirable (receiving four stickers, scoring up to two points in a ball toss) and two undesirable (receiving one sticker, scoring no points) outcomes. Children showed the intensity bias by overpredicting how negatively they would feel if they received one sticker, but not for scoring no points. We discuss how task factors (e.g., personal volition) and cognitive mechanisms (e.g., immune neglect) may influence children's tendency to show the intensity bias. Statement of contribution What is already known on this subject? Adults tend to overpredict the intensity of their emotional reactions to future events. Whether similar 'affective forecasting' errors characterize preschoolers' predictions is not known. What does this study add? We created two forecasting tasks ('sticker' and 'ball') with both desirable and undesirable outcomes. We obtained evidence for a 'negativity' but not a 'positivity' bias in children's predictions. On the sticker task, children overpredicted how badly they would feel after receiving one, versus, four stickers.

You'll change more than I will: Adults' predictions about their own and others' future preferences.

It has been argued that adults underestimate the extent to which their preferences will change over time. We sought to determine whether such mispredictions are the result of a difficulty imagining that one's own current and future preferences may differ or whether it also characterizes our predictions about the future preferences of others. We used a perspective-taking task in which we asked young people how much they liked stereotypically young-person items (e.g., Top 40 music, adventure vacations) and stereotypically old-person items (e.g., jazz, playing bridge) now, and how much they would like them in the distant future (i.e., when they are 70 years old). Participants also made these same predictions for a generic same-age, same-sex peer. In a third condition, participants predicted how much a generic older (i.e., age 70) same-sex adult would like items from both categories today. Participants predicted less change between their own current and future preferences than between the current and future preferences of a peer. However, participants estimated that, compared to a current older adult today, their peer would like stereotypically young items more in the future and stereotypically old items less. The fact that peers' distant-future estimated preferences were different from the ones they made for "current" older adults suggests that even though underestimation of change of preferences over time is attenuated when thinking about others, a bias still exists.