Infants Integrate Probability and Number When Reasoning Under Uncertainty
Terri Middleton & Stephanie Denison
INTRODUCTION
Background
Infants have surprisingly strong quantitative reasoning abilities:
At 10 months, infants can determine which of two jars containing different
numbers of objects has a larger quantity when comparisons are made with
three or fewer objects.1
  We tested infants at three age ranges to examine the development of this
  integration:
  10 months (N= 16; Mean age =10.63; R = 10.22 – 10.97)
  11 months (N= 16; Mean age =11.71; R = 11.20 – 11.96)
 
Additionally, by 6 months, infants can engage in simple probabilistic
inference in VOE looking-time studies: that is, when an infant sees a
container with e.g., a 4:1 ratio of one object-type to another, they infer that
the object types in the majority are most likely to be drawn at random2
Probable Outcome Improbable Outcome
By 10 months, infants can predict which of two distributions is most likely to
yield a preferred object on a single random draw in an action task. 3
The present study tests the interaction between infants’ numerical knowledge
and probability estimates, using the task illustrated above.
There were 2 trial types
 
Trial 1:
One container has 28 pink and 4 black lollipops and the experimenter draws 1
lollipop from here. A second container has 4 pink and 28 black lollipops
and the experimenter draws 3 from here. To maximize the chances of
obtaining a pink lollipop, one should choose the draw with a single
lollipop, as the probability of obtaining a pink lollipop here is 88%,
whereas the draw with 3 lollipops has only a 34% probability of yielding at
least one pink.
Trial 2:
One container has 8 pink and 12 black lollipops and the experimenter draws 3
lollipops from here. A second container has 12 pink and 8 black lollipops
and the experimenter draws 1 lollipop from here. To maximize the
chances of obtaining a pink lollipop, one should choose the draw with 3
lollipops, as the probability of obtaining at least 1 pink lollipop here is 81%,
  of probabilistic reasoning in very young infants:
whereas the draw with 1 lollipop has only a 60% probability of being pink.
2015 Biennial Meeting of the Society for Research in Child Development
University of Waterloo RESULTS & DISCUSSION
METHOD Results
Trial Type 1: 28/48 infants chose the correct sample (i.e., one lollipop),
Participants not significantly different from chance of 50%, t(47) = 1.16, p = .25.
Trial Type 2: 34/48 infants chose the correct sample (three lollipops),
significantly different from chance of 50%, t(47) = 3.14, p = .003.
This suggests that infants from 10 – 12 months can succeed at Trial
12 months (N= 16; Mean age =12.48; R = 12.09 – 12.98) Type 2, in which they must choose a sample of three objects from a
container with a lower proportion of the objects they like. They did not
Procedure succeed at Trial Type 1, performing at chance when the correct
response required choosing the sample of 1 object from a high
Step 1: Preference trial. proportion distribution.
The following chart analyzes infant performance by age:
Step 2: Test Trial 1.
Step 2a: Show distributions
Step 2b: Experimenter samples
Step 2c: Infant encouraged to Hp1d = Trial type 1, the correct choice is 1 draw from a high proportion container.
walk/crawl to a cup Hp3d = Trial type 2, the correct choice is 3 draws from a low proportion container.
Exploring the developmental pattern
When data are re-coded to give infants a score of 1 for choosing the
sample of three draws and a score of 0 for choosing a sample of 1 draw,
Step 3: Test Trial 2. we find:
•  10-month-olds are biased toward choosing 3 draws, regardless of trial
Step 3a: Show distributions type (i.e., the make-up of distributions). Infants chose three lollipops
at near identical rates on both trial types, t(30) = .81, p = .43.
•  12-month-olds appear to correctly choose one or three draws,
Step 3b: Experimenter samples depending on which was most likely to yield a preferred object based
on the distributions. Infants chose the sample with three objects at
different rates on each trial type, t(30)= 4.39, p < .001.
•  11-month-olds appear to be in transition, with slightly better
performance than 10-month-olds, but not choosing three draw
Step 3c: Infant encouraged to samples at different rates based on trial type, t(30) = 1.05, p = .30.
walk/crawl to a cup We conclude that the integration of numerical and probabilistic
reasoning may be undergoing significant development between 10 and
12 months of age.
Predictions
If infants choose the sample container with one draw in the first trial type
and the sample container with three draws on the second trial type, then
REFERENCES
this will suggest that they can integrate probability and number, as this 1. Feigenson, L., Carey, S., & Hauser, M. (2002). The representations underlying infants’ choice of more: object
files versus analog magnitudes. Psy. Sci., 13, 150–156.
would require them to consider both the distribution and the number of 2. Denison, S., Reed, C., & Xu, F. (2013). The emergence
Evidence from 4.5- and 6-month-olds. Dev. Psych., 49(2), 243-249.
draws when reasoning about sampling. 3. Denison, S. & Xu, F. (2010). 12- to 14-month-old infants can predict single-event probability with large set
sizes. Dev. Sci., 13, 798-803.