Does a peer model’s task proficiency influence children’s solution choice and innovation?

The current study investigated whether 4- to 6-year-old children’s task solution choice was influenced by the past proficiency of familiar peer models and the children’s personal prior task experience. Peer past proficiency was established through behavioral assessments of interactions with novel tasks alongside peer and teacher predictions of each child’s proficiency. Based on these assessments, one peer model with high past proficiency and one age-, sex-, dominance-, and popularity-matched peer model with lower past proficiency were trained to remove a capsule using alternative solutions from a three-solution artificial fruit task. Video demonstrations of the models were shown to children after they had either a personal successful interaction or no interaction with the task. In general, there was not a strong bias toward the high past-proficiency model, perhaps due to a motivation to acquire multiple methods and the salience of other transmission biases. However, there was some evidence of a model-based past-proficiency bias; when the high past-proficiency peer matched the participants’ original solution, there was increased use of that solution, whereas if the high past-proficiency peer demonstrated an alternative solution, there was increased use of the alternative social solution and novel solutions. Thus, model proficiency influenced innovation.

Building bridges between user and designer: co-creation, immersion and perspective taking

Designing for users rather than with users is still a common practice in technology design and innovation as opposed to taking them on board in the process. Design for inclusion aims to define and understand end-users, their needs, context of use, and, by doing so, ensure that end-users are catered for and included, while the results are geared towards universality of use. We describe the central role of end-user and designer participation, immersion and perspective to build user-driven solutions. These approaches provided a critical understanding of the counterpart role. Designer(s) could understand what the user’s needs were, experience physical impairments, and see from other’s perspective the interaction with the environment. Users could understand challenges of designing for physical impairments, build a sense of ownership with technology and explore it from a creative perspective. The understanding of the peer’s role (user and designer), needs and perspective enhanced user participation and inclusion.