ArticlePsychological research2026
Children require more evidence to revise beliefs under gradual perceptual change.
Article in Psychological research, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Rafetseder et al. (2021) were the first to demonstrate that children have difficulty revising their beliefs when objects morphed from one object (e.g. a rabbit) into another (e.g. a duck). Children aged four to eight reported the second object significantly later than adults. This is surprising, because both children and adults were presented with the same initial information ("it is a rabbit") and were exposed to the same contradictory visual evidence. We conducted three experiments to replicate the results and to and explore reasons for children's delayed belief revision. In Experiment 1 (N = 58; 3- to 6-year-olds), we demonstrated that children only struggle to identify the second object in the gradual condition, while displaying adult-like categorical perception when the same images were presented individually outside of the morphing context. In Experiment 2 (N = 86; 6- to 11-year-olds), we found that only children aged 9 years and over showed a similar pattern to adults, and that a global processing style facilitated identification of the second object. In Experiment 3 (N = 47, 5- to 6-year-olds), when children were explicitly informed of the two possible interpretations of the morphed images, their performance improved, although not to the level observed in the individual condition of Experiment 1. These findings suggest that children of different ages struggle to revise their beliefs in a gradually changing environment for different reasons. While older children may use less efficient, potentially local, exploration strategies, younger children may have difficulties with mental imagery.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.