Original Articles Young children’s tool innovation across culture: Affordance visibility matters Karri Neldner a,⇑ , Ilana Mushin b , Mark Nielsen a,c a Early Cognitive Development Centre, School of Psychology, University of Queensland, Australia b School of Languages & Comparative Cultural Studies, University of Queensland, Australia c Faculty of Humanities, University of Johannesburg, South Africa article info Article history: Received 21 June 2016 Revised 26 July 2017 Accepted 31 July 2017 Keywords: Cross-cultural Tool manufacture Tool innovation Innovation Affordance Cognitive development abstract Young children typically demonstrate low rates of tool innovation. However, previous studies have lim- ited children’s performance by presenting tools with opaque affordances. In an attempt to scaffold chil- dren’s understanding of what constitutes an appropriate tool within an innovation task we compared tools in which the focal affordance was visible to those in which it was opaque. To evaluate possible cul- tural specificity, data collection was undertaken in a Western urban population and a remote Indigenous community. As expected affordance visibility altered innovation rates: young children were more likely to innovate on a tool that had visible affordances than one with concealed affordances. Furthermore, innovation rates were higher than those reported in previous innovation studies. Cultural background did not affect children’s rates of tool innovation. It is suggested that new methods for testing tool inno- vation in children must be developed in order to broaden our knowledge of young children’s tool inno- vation capabilities. Ó 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction The extent to which humans innovate with tools remains unparalleled within the animal kingdom (Carr, Kendal, & Flynn, 2016; Vaesen, 2012). Yet the capacity for tool innovation appears curiously absent in young children, with multiple studies showing that prior to 8 years of age children struggle to innovate even sim- ple tools on their own (Beck, Apperly, Chappell, Guthrie, & Cutting, 2011; Beck, Williams, Cutting, Apperly, & Chappell, 2016; Cutting, 2013; Cutting, Apperly, Chappell, & Beck, 2014; Nielsen, 2013). This is curious, as from a young age children are adept tool users (Brown, 1990; Connolly & Dalgleish, 1989; Harris, 2005). However, previous studies may have limited children’s performance by pre- senting tools with opaque affordances. In addition, the vast major- ity of testing to date has been conducted using the same methodology, and tested almost exclusively children from Western cultural backgrounds (Nielsen, Tomaselli, Mushin, & Whiten, 2014). These factors may individually or in combination lead to apparent tool innovation failure that may not accurately portray children’s true capacities. Children are driven to explore and utilize the material world around them (Bakeman, Adamson, Konner, & Barr, 1990; Bock, 2005; Gaskins, 2000; Kaye, 1982; Keller et al., 2009; Little, Carver, & Legare, 2016; Piaget & Cook, 1952; Rogoff et al., 1993). By the age of four months, infants from Western and traditional societies demonstrate a sustained interest in objects, and by 8– 11 months begin to engage in relational play with objects (Belsky & Most, 1981; Bjorklund & Gardiner, 2011; Bourgeois, Khawar, Neal, & Lockman, 2005; Konner, 1976). This interest persists well into the early childhood years, manifesting as object play, con- struction and manipulation (Bakeman et al., 1990; Belsky & Most, 1981; Bock & Johnson, 2004; Little et al., 2016; Smith & Simon, 1984), as children examine the causal relationships existing between objects and the environment (Bjorklund & Gardiner, 2011; Lockman, 2000; Pepler & Rubin, 1982; Piaget & Cook, 1952). At the age of nine months children begin to use tools to reach for objects far away from them (Willatts, 1984), and by two years they can competently use tools such as spoons and rakes (Brown, 1990; Connolly & Dalgleish, 1989; Harris, 2005; McCarty, Clifton, & Collard, 2001). They can even invent simple tool-use behaviors independently by three years (Reindl, Beck, Apperly, & Tennie, 2016). Young children are also capable of tool manufac- ture: constructing or modifying tools after watching an adult manipulate relevant materials (Barr & Hayne, 1999; Bauer, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2017.07.015 0010-0277/Ó 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. ⇑ Corresponding author. E-mail address: karri.neldner@uqconnect.edu.au (K. Neldner). Cognition 168 (2017) 335–343 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Cognition journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/COGNIT