Children's strategic compensation for size underconstancy: Dependence on distance and relation to reasoning ability

When asked to judge the size of a distant object, older children are more likely than younger ones to report deliberately inflating their judgements to compensate for size underconstancy (Granrud, in press). The current investigation examined whether use of this strategy depends on object distance and whether it is related to individual differences in reasoning, knowledge about size perception, or cognitive style. In two studies, children in Grades 1–3 estimated the size of a distant (61 m away) and near (6.1 m away) disc. In each, half of the children reported inflating their judgement of the distant disc to compensate for a tendency to underestimate its size, but only a few reported using this strategy for the near disc. Self-reported strategy users tended to either judge the distant disc accurately or to overestimate its size, whereas the other children tended to underestimate its size. Strategy reporters obtained higher scores on a test of verbal reasoning, but did not differ from the other children in reflectivity-impulsivity. In Study 1, strategy reporters also showed a better understanding of how distance affects the apparent size of objects in photographs. This understanding was strongly related to verbal reasoning ability. In Study 2, visuospatial reasoning ability was also found to predict who would report strategy use, and this predictive relation was independent of verbal reasoning ability.