Ok, I must have read something wrong, but what they are saying is that children put more trust in people giving them useful clues than people giving them not useful clues. Something that seems quite reasonable.
Which makes me confused by this quote: "... it suggests that children may not be as savvy as previous research has suggested."
Obviously a "helpful" clue that doesn't improve your chance of success (they always succeed) isn't really helpful. Isn't it quite savvy to recognise that?
If someone has gotten a better understanding of what they are actually trying to say I'd like to hear it.
There might be an interesting result in it somewhere, as it could be interpreted to imply that only slightly challenging kids in an educational context could lead them to believe that their learning efforts has no use if the challenges are adjusted to never let them fail. But I don't see how the results could be interpreted to mean what the title says.
Which makes me confused by this quote: "... it suggests that children may not be as savvy as previous research has suggested."
Obviously a "helpful" clue that doesn't improve your chance of success (they always succeed) isn't really helpful. Isn't it quite savvy to recognise that?
If someone has gotten a better understanding of what they are actually trying to say I'd like to hear it.
There might be an interesting result in it somewhere, as it could be interpreted to imply that only slightly challenging kids in an educational context could lead them to believe that their learning efforts has no use if the challenges are adjusted to never let them fail. But I don't see how the results could be interpreted to mean what the title says.