In certain domains, people represent some of an individual's properties (e.g., a tiger's ferocity), but not others (e.g., a tiger's being in the zoo), as stemming from the assumed "essence" of the individual's category. How do children identify which properties of an individual are essentialized and which are not? Here, we examine whether formal explanations-that is, explanations that appeal to category membership (e.g., "That's ferocious because it's a tiger")-help children to identify which properties are essentialized. We investigated this question in two domains: animal kinds (Study 1) and social categories (specifically, gender; Studies 2 and 3). Across studies, we introduced children to novel behaviors and preferences of individuals using either a formal explanation or closely matched wording that did not express a formal explanation. To measure the extent to which children essentialized the novel properties, we assessed their inferences about the stability, innateness, and generalizability of these properties. In Study 1 (N = 104; 61 girls, 43 boys; predominantly White and multiracial children from high-income backgrounds), we found that formal explanations led 5- and 6-year-old children to view novel properties of individual animals as more stable across time. In Studies 2 and 3 (total N = 163; 84 girls, 79 boys; predominantly White, Asian, and multiracial children from high-income backgrounds), we found that formal explanations led 6-year-olds, but not 5-year-olds, to view novel properties of individual girls and boys as more stable across contexts. These studies highlight an important mechanism by which formal explanations guide conceptual development. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2022 APA, all rights reserved).

中文翻译：

---

正式的解释塑造了儿童对动物种类和社会群体的表征。

在某些领域，人代表了个人的某些属性（例如，老虎的凶猛性），但不代表其他属性（例如，老虎在动物园里），这源于个人类别的假定“本质”。孩子们如何识别一个人的哪些属性是本质化的，哪些不是？在这里，我们检查正式的解释——即吸引类别成员的解释（例如，“它很凶猛，因为它是一只老虎”）——是否帮助儿童识别哪些属性是本质化的。我们在两个领域调查了这个问题：动物种类（研究 1）和社会类别（特别是性别；研究 2 和 3）。纵观研究，我们使用正式解释或没有表达正式解释的密切匹配的措辞，向孩子介绍个人的新行为和偏好。为了衡量儿童对新特性的本质化程度，我们评估了他们对这些特性的稳定性、先天性和普遍性的推断。在研究 1（N = 104；61 名女孩，43 名男孩；主要是来自高收入背景的白人和多种族儿童）中，我们发现正式的解释导致 5 岁和 6 岁的儿童将个体动物的新特性视为更多跨时间稳定。在研究 2 和 3（总人数 = 163；84 名女孩，79 名男孩；主要是来自高收入背景的白人、亚裔和多种族儿童）中，我们发现正式的解释能引导 6 岁的孩子，而不是 5 岁的孩子老人，将个别女孩和男孩的新特性视为在不同情况下更加稳定。这些研究强调了一种重要机制，正式解释通过该机制指导概念发展。（PsycInfo 数据库记录 (c) 2022 APA，保留所有权利）。