Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust • Hacker News Board

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#61

Post by kosma » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 5:51 PM UTC

foobarian wrote: post #47

joaorico wrote: post #17

One solution strategy that works very well from my experience is to ask them upfront whether they want to play "for real" or to play to learn. [edit: A third mode is "for (silly) fun" where everything is allowed.] This works for all ages... and for boardgames and physical games. It's their choice which mode they want to play in, and they trust and respect you more when given the choice. You treat them as a peer. You…

How did you get your kids started with board-game type games? I have a 3yro and we just have "silly fun" with dice but I'm trying to figure out how to show him the "move N places forward" mechanic where N is the number on the die.

Isn't 3yo a bit too early? I mean, at three years old a child is legally smart enough not to swallow the dice... but I thought knowing how to interpret numbers and apply them is a bit more advanced than knowing not to eat the numbery thing. ;)

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#62

Post by aswanson » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:03 PM UTC

glaberficken wrote: post #7

Confessing I didn't read the article, but from my parenting experience - Beating your kids at games teaches them one very important thing about real life: to learn a skill you have to practice repeatedly. This inevitably involves frustration and persistence which any human being should be prepared to deal with in life.

The earlier this lesson is learned, the better the life lived.

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#63

Post by masklinn » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:13 PM UTC

joaorico wrote: post #17

One solution strategy that works very well from my experience is to ask them upfront whether they want to play "for real" or to play to learn. [edit: A third mode is "for (silly) fun" where everything is allowed.] This works for all ages... and for boardgames and physical games. It's their choice which mode they want to play in, and they trust and respect you more when given the choice. You treat them as a peer. You…

An other option is to play cooperative rather than competitive games.

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#64

Post by foobarian » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:15 PM UTC

kosma wrote: post #61

foobarian wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you get your kids started with board-game type games? I have a 3yro and we just have "silly fun" with dice but I'm trying to figure out how to show him the "move N places forward" mechanic where N is the number on the die.

Isn't 3yo a bit too early? I mean, at three years old a child is legally smart enough not to swallow the dice... but I thought knowing how to interpret numbers and apply them is a bit more advanced than knowing not to eat the numbery thing. ;)

Yeah fair enough, I was just wondering about the future. How did you build up to a full board game with your kid? What were the phases? 1. Succeed in not eating the dice 2. ??? 3. Play a game of Sorry! within the rules.

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#65

Post by tel » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:19 PM UTC

joaorico wrote: post #17

One solution strategy that works very well from my experience is to ask them upfront whether they want to play "for real" or to play to learn. [edit: A third mode is "for (silly) fun" where everything is allowed.] This works for all ages... and for boardgames and physical games. It's their choice which mode they want to play in, and they trust and respect you more when given the choice. You treat them as a peer. You…

A common idea in Go is that a stronger player will play a "teaching game" with a weaker one. The game is sufficiently abstract and complex that the weaker player may not even notice the actions of the stronger player who endeavors to play poorly so that they are only slightly better than their opponent and have the opportunity to share new ideas and tricks at a level appropriate to their student.

Obviously, these have to be done intentionally. A weaker player who nearly wins only to discover their opponent was "teaching" is probably a bit offended: their accomplishment stolen from beneath them.

What aids all of this is that Go has a handicapping system that can be very well tuned so that for people who would score within 40-60 points of one another you can probably tune the game down to even odds.

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#66

Post by eatbitseveryday » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:25 PM UTC

jungrothmorton wrote: post #59

eatbitseveryday wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am curious. Can you give a concrete example or two? Also, if not about a board game, where else would this apply?

The comment you're replying to described it as three choices, but you can also consider it a spectrum. pure instruction -> teaching through playing -> friendly match -> competitive match Let's use a card game as an example. Pure instruction: Both players play with their cards visible to each other, and the teacher coaches rules and strategy as they play. Teaching through playing: The hands are now private, but the te…

Thanks. Wouldn't there also be the "I am wiser than you, and can either play 'easy' or play my best" even when playing competitively? "Competitive match" as you define it is more about following the rules, not the effort put in to actually try to win and outmaneuver the other player.

Think of a chess game, for example. We can play by the rules to the letter, but if I decide to systematically take your pieces one-by-one or "forget" some of my own experience to perhaps make it more fun, are elements I assumed are in the original comment above.

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#67

Post by mistermann » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:28 PM UTC

foobarian wrote: post #64

kosma wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't 3yo a bit too early? I mean, at three years old a child is legally smart enough not to swallow the dice... but I thought knowing how to interpret numbers and apply them is a bit more advanced than knowing not to eat the numbery thing. ;)

Yeah fair enough, I was just wondering about the future. How did you build up to a full board game with your kid? What were the phases? 1. Succeed in not eating the dice 2. ??? 3. Play a game of Sorry! within the rules.

It won't be very long and your child will be teaching YOU games that she/he learned from friends. :)

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#68

Post by lostlogin » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:31 PM UTC

cheald wrote: post #37

SeanDav wrote: post #29

I was taught chess at age 6 by a national level player. While I have no doubt he never had to try hard to beat me, he never let me win. I was a far better player as a result. While I never won, I was never discouraged, because he would always point out where I had made good plays and where I could have done better, in a very interactive manner. This has got to be one of the best ways to learn.

My dad, while never a national level player, taught me chess, and likewise never let me win. The day that I beat him for the first time was an enormous triumph for me, and I'm happily imparting that to my own kids now. My 8 year old hadn't beat me yet, but his game has developed rapidly and that first win isn't very far off now. I'll offer him advice and help him understand why a given move was good or bad, but his m…

In the chess arena - if heard a couple of good reviews of this game lately. Chess with random pieces but you get worse prices the better you play. Off for a game now. Really Bad Chess by Zach Gage https://appsto.re/nz/XHxjcb.i

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#69

Post by dang » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:34 PM UTC

alexandercrohde wrote: post #45

I have no idea how this made front-page. The title is inconsistent with the article title, and even the article title seems inflated to what it describes. As I understand it, the experimental group played a game they couldn't lose (rigged) and adults gave them "hints." The kids [correctly] identified that they weren't dependent on the adults' help in that group. However, there doesn't even seem to be a link to the ac…

If you or anyone can suggest a better (i.e. more accurate and neutral title), we can change it. The HN guidelines call for changing titles when they are either linkbait or misleading (and that's not an xor).

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

Re: Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

#70

Post by ryanklee » Sat, Dec 10, 2016, 6:37 PM UTC

kosma wrote: post #61

foobarian wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How did you get your kids started with board-game type games? I have a 3yro and we just have "silly fun" with dice but I'm trying to figure out how to show him the "move N places forward" mechanic where N is the number on the die.

Isn't 3yo a bit too early? I mean, at three years old a child is legally smart enough not to swallow the dice... but I thought knowing how to interpret numbers and apply them is a bit more advanced than knowing not to eat the numbery thing. ;)

3 years old is definitely not too early to start playing structured games.

At first, early on, games should be very simple. The idea is to focus solely on the basic structure of games:

     --game start 
     --keep attention on game
     --turn taking/following in correct sequence
     --problem solving around a very simple goal
     --game end
     --with finally very clear assessment of player ranking (i.e. You won, I/we lost or I won, You lost)

Underlying all this should be a heavy focus on the maintenance of appropriate emotional responses and behavior modeling (e.g., no gloating, no sore losers, no emotional aggression or defensiveness).

Again, this is all ground-floor stuff, so kids can start learning it as early as 2-ish. Learning to take turns is a huge emotional advantage. As is learning how to both succeed and fail in games and life with grace.

A very good game that has a degree of complexity appropriate to kids that young is "Animal Upon Animal" by HABA.[0]

It's a simple stacking game: On your turn, stack this animal on that animal; if the stack of animals falls over, that's the fail state. (There is a 6-sided dice with pictures on 4 of its faces, and 1 and 2 pips on the the remaining, but it can easily be removed from the game until the child in question is ready for it.)

[0]http://a.co/bJ8syTL