Reconceptualizing Persistence: Exploratory Behavior as Rational Adaptation

• In Event: To Persist or not: The Powerful Influence of Outcomes on Persistence Across Development

Abstract

Our everyday conversations about persistence often emphasize grit, trying harder, and “never giving up.” This intuitive notion, that staying committed to a task in the face of difficulty is essential, has been supported by previous work, linking persistence to positive cognitive and life outcomes. However, in the conversation on persistence, it is simultaneously important to understand that persistence is a behavioral decision. Therefore, the decision to persist will only be made when it is rational to do so and evaluations leading to this decision are sensitive to cost, benefit, and overall utility.

Much of previous research into persistence has focused on unidimensional measures of trying. For example, how many times infants attempt to exploit the main affordance of an object (Leonard, Lee & Schulz, 2017; Lucca & Wilbourn, 2018), or total time on task (Frodi, Bridges & Grolnick, 1985; Yarrow et al., 1982). However, as infants accumulate evidence that their efforts are ineffective, the decision to enact simple imitative and exploitative behaviors becomes increasingly less adaptive. Therefore, in these situations, infants may taper their overall engagement or instead begin to direct their efforts towards exploring the problem.

To test whether infants prioritize imitative or exploratory behaviors, and the effects of this prioritization on task engagement, behavioral coding was performed using previously collected data (Lucca et al., 2020). Ninety-six 18-month olds (17.67 – 19.30 months; MAGE = 18.5; 38 female) took turns across three trials with an experimenter solving a difficult task to retrieve a toy. In each trial, an experimenter first demonstrated attempting to retrieve the toy, then participants engaged in a test trial in which success was impossible. Behavioral coding was performed to classify 5-second intervals of test trials into imitative, exploratory, and off-task behaviors. On average, infants spent significantly more time exploring rather than imitating the experimenter (MDiff= 0.84 intervals; t(95)=6.28, p<0.01). Further, the difference in the number of intervals spent exploring and imitating was used to predict total task engagement. While the trial number predicted less task engagement (β=-3.22, t(193)=-8.20, p<0.01), exploring more relative to imitating predicted more task engagement (β=0.53, t(282)=2.56, p=0.01). Therefore, children adapted to repeated evidence of failure by reducing efforts, but exploration may have served as a buffer by providing alternative avenues for trying.

These results demonstrate that infants’ persistence is fundamentally rational: they adapt their engagement to its perceived utility and look for new solutions when obvious options fail. While perhaps intuitive, this work speaks to the importance of understanding infant’s trying behaviors as an adaptive constellation. Persistence is not just a matter of trying harder or longer to replicate an adult’s actions or exploit the primary affordance of an object. Rather, persistence represents a complex set of behaviors which seek to adapt and innovate as failure is encountered.

Authors

• Mia Radovanovic, University of Toronto
  Presenting Author

• Antonia K Soldovieri, University of Toronto
  Non-Presenting Author

• Hannah Solby, University of Toronto
  Non-Presenting Author

• Rachel Horton, University Of Washington
  Non-Presenting Author

• Kelsey Lucca, Arizona State University
  Non-Presenting Author

• Jessica A Sommerville, University of Toronto
  Non-Presenting Author