No one likes a copycat, no matter where you live

by Doree Armstrong

Even very young children understand what it means to steal a physical object, yet it appears to take them another couple of years to understand what it means to steal an idea.

University of Washington psychologist Kristina Olson and colleagues from Yale and the University of Pennsylvania discovered that preschoolers often don't view a copycat negatively, but they do by the age of 5 or 6. And that holds true even across that typically view in different ways.

"Physical property is something that can be seen, but intellectual property is something that can't be seen, and it's hard to understand, let alone place a value on that," Olson said. "So it's not surprising that it's so hard for younger kids to understand intellectual property rights."

The results are published in the Journal of Experimental Child Psychology.

The researchers wanted to know whether young in different cultures placed more value on unique artwork or copies of someone else's work. They evaluated 3- to 6-year-old children in the United States, Mexico and China – chosen by the researchers based on the different emphasis each country places on the protection of intellectual property and ideas.

Researchers had children watch videos of puppets producing a unique drawing or plagiarizing another character's drawing. The videos were in the children's native language (English, Mandarin or Spanish).

This video is not supported by your browser at this time.
One puppet peeks at another puppet's drawing because he can't decide what to draw, but he then draws a unique picture. Credit: Kristina Olson, UW Psychology Dept.

Each child watched three 30-second videos. At the beginning of each video, one puppet looked at what the other puppet was drawing. In one video, the puppet that peeked then created an identical drawing. In the second video, he created a similar drawing with the same theme but different colors and shape elements. In the third, the puppet that looked at the other's drawing drew a completely different picture.

After watching each video, the children rated how good or bad the puppets were.

Five- and 6-year-olds from all three cultures rated the who copied the others' work negatively. However, 3- and 4-year-olds evaluated plagiarism much differently than the older children, as well as differently across cultures. Mexican preschoolers rated unique drawers more positively than the plagiarizers, but, American and Chinese 3- and 4-year-olds didn't distinguish much between characters who created original drawings and plagiarized ones. And Chinese preschoolers rated copycats more positively than those who drew something similar.

"Sometimes copying is good; for example, when we learn to write, we all learn this is how you make an A, so that's not considered plagiarism," Olson said. "That may be confusing to children, because sometimes we tell them to come up with novel ideas but other times they're supposed to copy. It's interesting to think about how kids are sorting that out."

The researchers chose to study children in the U.S., which has strong protections in place for intellectual property, and China, which did not until very recently (establishing its first patent law in 1984, more than 150 years after the U.S. and most of Europe). They also chose Mexico because it is in the middle of the spectrum in protecting .

"This is a nice example of how we often think there are huge differences across cultures and that a lot of everyday judgments are colored by our culture. But, this study shows that even in very different cultures, the underlying psychology is sometimes quite similar," Olson said. "By age 5 or 6 across all of these cultures you find that kids think being a copycat is bad."

More information: www.sciencedirect.com/science/… ii/S0022096513002452

add to favorites email to friend print save as pdf

Related Stories

Toddlers value people who help, study shows

Apr 30, 2013

According to a new study out of Queen's University, even very young children value people that help them and are motivated to return the favour. The study revealed that those children, when asked to pick one person to help, ...

Four-year-olds know that being right is not enough

Aug 18, 2011

As they grow, children learn a lot about the world from what other people tell them. Along the way, they have to figure out who is a reliable source of information. A new study, which will be published in an upcoming issue ...

Empathy helps children to understand sarcasm

Oct 08, 2013

The greater the empathy skills of children, the easier it is for them to recognize sarcasm, according to a new study in the open-access journal Frontiers in Psychology.

Recommended for you

Could summer camp be the key to world peace?

4 hours ago

According to findings from a new study by University of Chicago Booth School of Business Professor Jane Risen, and Chicago Booth doctoral student Juliana Schroeder, it may at least be a start.

Gender disparities in cognition will not diminish

Jul 28, 2014

The study, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, investigated the extent to which improvements in living conditions and educational opportunities over a person's life affect cognitive abilities and th ...

Facial features are the key to first impressions

Jul 28, 2014

A new study by researchers in the Department of Psychology at the University of York shows that it is possible to accurately predict first impressions using measurements of physical features in everyday images of faces, such ...

User comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

Zera
not rated yet Mar 11, 2014
This sounds like corporate dick-suckery. You're confusing Intellectual Property Law, imply morally relativistic outcomes based upon the age of a child.

"Liar, Liar, Pants on fire"

Children learn what it's like to steal and have ideas stolen.
Interesting equivilent in adults would be to hear someone tell a joke you told them, study your own reaction.

While IP Law, has been abused to create vast revenue streams for people "owning" artists and musicians.

The question I ask, do you think copying music, video, programs and pictures for personal usage, without compensation to the producer, is wrong?