Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Let your kids lose: Success inhibits preschoolers’ selective trust

sciencedaily.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 122 posts

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

#111

Post by tormeh »

667 wrote: post #105
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.

There are games that are simpler and better for kids than trying to get them to slog through Monopoly or whatever. My First Carcassonne and Sushi Go! are two we like and they're playable for adults too. (A lot of kids games are terrible, ones based on licenses like Disney or Paw Patrol for example.) Also check out Peaceable Kingdom they make cooperative games for kids (Hoot Owl Hoot, Race to The Treasure, etc.) I hav…

Spiel Des Jahres has a children's category. The 2016 winner was Stone Age Junior and the 2015 one was Spinderella.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiel_des_Jahres

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

#113

Post by inimino »

NPMaxwell wrote: post #31
ordu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not a solution, I believe. Random success is not based on decision making skills. Random success will teach child to make random decisions. Just not be afraid to really lose to your child in game which at start equally unknown for both you and your child. Let your child to learn how to win and learn how to learn to win. As an example of such a learning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11653538 If you or your…

I'm guessing that you meant to type "learn how to win and learn how to lose", which is a great point. Understanding how to move forward happily after failure is a huge asset.

That is another good point but I think they meant to type what they typed.

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

#114

Post by ordu »

NPMaxwell wrote: post #31
ordu wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Its not a solution, I believe. Random success is not based on decision making skills. Random success will teach child to make random decisions. Just not be afraid to really lose to your child in game which at start equally unknown for both you and your child. Let your child to learn how to win and learn how to learn to win. As an example of such a learning: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11653538 If you or your…

I'm guessing that you meant to type "learn how to win and learn how to lose", which is a great point. Understanding how to move forward happily after failure is a huge asset.

Yes, you are right, game maybe used to teach child to lose. And of course should be used in such manner.

But I meant something different. Learning how to play particular game is a small step to aquiring general learning skills. How to learn is a great problem, and many do not know efficient ways to learn something. But its very important not only to move forward after a failure, but to become smarter and increase chances of making successful decisions on the next occasion to win.

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

#115

Post by dang »

throwaway729 wrote: post #86
dang wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

Both the subtitle of the linked article and the published journal article's main title are: "Success inhibits preschoolers’ ability to establish selective trust ". The "establish selective trust" phrase is much more accurate than just "trust" -- in fact, the current title on HN in strictly incorrect . The preschoolers don't have problems trusting. Rather, you could argue that they're more trustworthy when they never…

Ok, we put 'selective' in the title. Thanks!

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

#116

Post by aklemm »

user837387 wrote: post #88
cheald wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I do not understand how can he beat you if you started playing as a kid. Granted, I don't know what I'm talking about but unless you are going senile I don't see how he can beat you while he's still a kid.

Winning one game against someone is different than being able to beat someone consistently.

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

#117

Post by kazagistar »

marmaduke wrote: post #85
kazagistar wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every time there is a scientific study, someone responds saying it has confirmed their worldview, and is therefore pointless, betraying a deep misunderstanding of the purpose of scientific studies.

amusing, I'm a scientist and a parent and yet I don't get it?

- Its important to validate the obvious, because sometimes its not so obvious.

- Having a flippant, dismissive, repetitive comment provides no value to the conversation and wastes the time of anyone reading.

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

#118

Post by Nomentatus »

nitrogen wrote: post #107
Nomentatus wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is why Napoleon favored generals who had the reputation of being consistently "lucky" - i.e., those whose excellence wasn't easily understood.

Could you maybe clarify the connection? Is the idea that "lucky" generals were actually experts beyond the comprehension of their peers?

Napoleon didn't clarify, I don't believe. The quote was "I would rather have a general who was lucky than one who was good." Certainly, "Beyond possible comprehension by others" isn't what I mean or a likely interpretation. "Succeeded for reasons beneath others notice" would be more the idea. As an example, Grant's tendency to thoroughly disambiguate his orders and always put them in writing (after a Shiloh order debacle) helped his luck a great deal. But it isn't something others would necessarily notice or be in a position to notice. Sheridan had some astonishing luck, but it was possible because he insisted his subordinates (each taking separate routes) be highly disciplined and courageous and get to each point exactly on time, no matter what. (Later, one of those subordinates, Custer, would be cut down because his peers didn't fulfill their orders and arrive on time to join him in battle despite all - and because he did push on as he'd been taught. Coordination only works if everybody's doing it.)

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

#119

Post by [deleted] »

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…

[deleted]

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

#120

Post by [deleted] »

mncharity wrote: post #100
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…

Another option is to take on additional objectives, which serve to handicap you. For instance, when competing to win, there's little room to be exploratory, playful, envelope pushing, maximizing learning. First tries at anything mostly fail. So I'll say "I'm going to focus on learning new things, not just on winning". And verbalize the exploration like "hmm, I wonder if...", attempt, and post mortem review ("I just t…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN