Children are not simply the ‘adults of the future.’

They often learn in ways that are more flexible, accurate, and open-minded than adults.

Research linked below shows that children are better than adults at identifying complex cause-and-effect relationships, exploring unfamiliar situations, and avoiding common thinking traps.

Children’s willingness to take risks and consider multiple possibilities helps them learn more effectively than adults in uncertain or complex environments. Children are also less likely to be misled by subtle suggestions and in some cases, recall events more reliably than adults. Morally, children exhibit a more egalitarian perspective, as they are more likely to value both animal and human life than adults

These findings have important implications for how we understand child development, teach and engage with children, and value their perspectives. Rather than seeing children through a deficit lens, as lacking skills, knowledge and guidance, we should recognise the unique ways they think and learn and create environments that build on children’s strengths and capabilities.

Cause and effect

Researchers have found that children aged 4-5 are surprisingly good at figuring out how things cause other things to happen. They can quickly learn different types of cause-and-effect patterns, use that knowledge to make decisions about new situations, and even figure out how to change or control outcomes.

One kind of cause-and-effect pattern is called a conjunctive relationship. This means that more than one cause needs to happen together to produce an effect. For example, if both pressing a button and turning a key are needed to open a box, this is a conjunctive relationship. Researchers have found that when children discover this kind of relationship, they learn and apply it more successfully than adults do. This is important as it suggests that children might be better at learning some types of complex relationships than adults. This finding suggests that even very young children can form general rules about how things work, and that these rules help them learn new things later on.

Valuing different life forms

One of the most interesting studies we came across showed that children aged 5 to 9 are more likely than adults to prioritise the lives of animals over humans in moral decision-making. In imagined life-or-death scenarios, many children chose to save several dogs over one human, and some valued a dog’s life equally to a human. While pigs were rated slightly lower, most children still chose to save 10 pigs over one person. In contrast, nearly all adults opted to save a single human over even 100 dogs. This study challenges the idea that children are simply ‘adults in training’ with less sophisticated thinking. Instead, it reveals that children possess a more egalitarian perspective when considering different life forms. Unlike adults, children have not yet fully internalised cultural norms that place human life above all others. As educators and researchers, knowing this helps us to sensitively and empathically frame our discussions with children about their much-loved pets, and on topics such as animal welfare, ethics and fairness.

Keep it simple, stupid

One study asked adults and children a series of simple questions and found that children gave more accurate responses, where adults appeared to overthink the question and assume they required metaphorical responses. This is important as it highlights how adults and children interpret language differently. This study reminds us that we cannot assume adults are always correct just because they are older – it depends on the question.

Exploring to learn

Another study found children aged 4-7 were better at exploring a situation than adults, even when there’s a risk involved, and this helps them learn more about how things work, especially in complex situations.

In the study, children and adults had to decide whether to approach or avoid objects that might give a reward (like stars or stickers) or a cost (losing stars or stickers). To learn the rules behind which objects were "good," participants had to try different options. However, adults tended to avoid taking risks, especially after a single bad outcome, which meant they missed chances to learn the full picture. This caused them to fall into ‘learning traps’ - staying stuck in mistaken beliefs.

In contrast, children were more willing to explore, even if they thought something might be bad. This helped them gather more evidence, avoid the learning trap, and figure out the more accurate (but complex) rules behind what made something rewarding or not.

Reliable Recall

We often assume that children are more easily influenced than adults or make up stories when recalling events. However, one study found that in some situations, children are less likely than adults to be misled or form false memories. These situations include:

When false information is complicated or relies on existing knowledge. Because adults know more about the world, they can fill in gaps with wrong but plausible information. For example, adults might falsely remember seeing a weapon at a robbery scene as they would expect it to be there, however children would not unless they actually saw it.

When a suggestion is subtle. As adults are better at inferring and understanding hints, they are more likely to be misled by tricky questions or assumptions. As children are more literal, they are less likely to be influenced by these subtle forms of suggestion.

We often assume that children do not make good eyewitnesses. However, in some cases adults are more vulnerable to suggestion than children. As children have fewer assumptions and simpler thinking, this can protect them from forming false beliefs.

When children outperform adults