Exploring the Development of Counterfactual Reasoning in Chinese Preschool Children

Abstract

Counterfactual reasoning is the ability to infer what outcomes would have resulted if a past event or state had been different. It is helpful for learning lessons from the past to draw blueprints for the future. Studies on counterfactual reasoning development have focused on children speaking languages that apply subjunctive forms to directly signal counterfactuality (e.g., English). Little has been known about the development of counterfactual reasoning in children speaking Chinese, which does not use subjunctive forms to indicate counterfactuality. This study investigated how counterfactual reasoning performance changed with age and whether counterfactual reasoning was associated with executive functions and receptive language in Chinese preschool children. A cross-sectional design was adopted. Counterfactual reasoning tasks that incorporated both subtractive (i.e., removing elements from reality) and additive (i.e., adding elements to reality) counterfactual reasoning were translated and adapted for Chinese preschool children. Two hundred and sixty-eight Chinese 4- to 6-year-olds (M = 65.25 months, SD = 7.76 months, 130 females) completed measures of counterfactual reasoning, executive functions, and receptive language. The psychometric properties of the translated and adapted counterfactual reasoning tasks were tested. Also, for each age group, counterfactual reasoning scores were compared to the chance-level performance by the one-sample Wilcoxon signed-rank test. In addition, the associations between counterfactual reasoning, executive functions, and receptive language were estimated by logistic regression. Finally, generalised estimating equations tested whether there were any differences between subtractive and additive counterfactual reasoning. The results showed that the counterfactual reasoning tasks had acceptable psychometric properties in Chinese preschool children. On these tasks, 4-year-olds started to show above-chance counterfactual reasoning performance. When subtractive and additive counterfactual premises described similar counterfactual scenarios, accuracy was significantly higher for subtractive than additive counterfactual reasoning. Also, inhibitory control was significantly associated with both subtractive and additive counterfactual reasoning. Finally, verbal short-term memory was significantly associated with subtractive but not additive counterfactual reasoning. The findings were discussed in relation to how counterfactuality is conveyed in Chinese, which does not apply subjunctive forms to directly signal counterfactuality. Also, the findings of this study were compared to the findings of previous studies in children speaking languages that apply subjunctive forms. These comparisons suggested the possibility that there might be cross-linguistic variations in the developmental patterns and developmental correlates of counterfactual reasoning. Hence, how a language expresses counterfactuality might affect how children speaking this language interpret and reason from counterfactual premises. Language might act as not only a communicative means but also a tool of thought. Future studies may directly test cross-linguistic variations to further understand the development of counterfactual reasoning, which is an ability that carries important adaptive functions.