What happens to children when they begin to question whether Santa (or Saint Nicholas) is actually real, and eventually draw the inevitable conclusion? And what can we learn from their (and our) experience?
Santa Claus (originally Father Christmas in Britain) and his close relation, Sinterklaas or Saint Nicholas, are mythical characters which, in parts of the world, are claimed to bring gifts to children, at least to those who have been nice, and not naughty. Many children believe in the actual existence of these characters, while there are pretty much zero adults who still do. How does that transition, from belief to disbelief actually happen, and is it something parents should worry about? And are there insights from this unique conversion that apply to other beliefs?
From belief to disbelief
New research led by Candice Mills, a psychologist at the University of Texas in Dallas, sheds light on the process by which children shift from belief to disbelief in the existence of Santa Claus. The researchers conducted two studies, one with 48 children aged 6-15 and their parents, and one with 383 adults about their experience as a child. Across both studies, they probed for several aspects of the transition, ranging from the age at which the doubt started creeping in to whether the transition from belief to disbelief spilled over to other domains.
Might be a problem for Santa, though (image:
Clive Hurst/Flickr CC BY NC 2.0)
On average, the children reported starting to doubt the existence of Santa between the ages of six and seven, and by the time they were eight had discovered the truth. The recollection of the adults matched the age of discovery, and in both cases, that age was higher if the parents promoted the myth more intensely, for example by hanging a stocking, singing Santa songs, leaving a carrot for the reindeer, etc. Most participants reported a gradual, rather than an abrupt transition from belief to scepticism, in which testimony from others significantly contributed to the eventual disbelief. Some also reported that their suspicion grew through observation (e.g., finding a receipt for a gift, or discovering hidden toys) or through logical reasoning (e.g., pondering the logistical impossibility of the scale at which Santa operates, or the problem of delivery through the chimney). I remember asking my mum how Sinterklaas managed to come down the chimney given that our purely decorative open fire was bricked up, and being told something about him being able to enter through the front door.
The feelings accompanying the realization of the truth (and abandoning the belief) were almost invariably mixed: sadness (that the magic was gone), but often also positive feelings like pride (of having figured it out) or happiness (to be "in the know"). Anger was rare, and any negative feelings almost never lasted more than a few months. They also did not prevent them from celebrating Santa with their own children (or intending to do so). Interesting to note is that negative feelings were associated with learning the truth at a later age and more abruptly, through testimony, and having grown up in families where Santa promotion was stronger.
Children did not trust their parents any less after learning the truth, nor did adults recall a drop in trust in their parents at the time. As their children's scepticism grew, however, the parents reported noticing an increasing doubt in the existence of other mythical characters like the Tooth Fairy and the Easter Bunny. The adults in the second study recalled a similar creeping of doubt. About 10% of them also reported the doubt spilled over onto some religious texts, but only in a few cases did this lead to a loss of religious faith.
The researchers conclude that there is little justification for fears about lasting effects of negative emotions in children at discovering that their belief in Santa Claus was unfounded – whether in the children's psychological wellbeing, or in their trust towards their parents. Furthermore, aside from the joy the whole Santa experience brings, some scholars suggest that the transition from belief to disbelief may have cognitive benefits for children, too. It may sharpen their curiosity and inquisitiveness, and teach intellectual humility as they have to revise their beliefs.
The stickiness of grown-up beliefs
Does this unique process of abandonment of a belief in children offer any insights on how we hang on to, or alternatively, revise our beliefs as adults? Unlike belief in Santa where there is a 100% transition, this does not happen for most other beliefs. No matter how far-fetched the belief, there are is always some group of people that clings on to it, in the face of overwhelming contradicting evidence.
The age at which children let go of their belief in Santa, or rather, the fact that it is associated with ageing, hints at a first important difference. As they grow older, their immediate peer group becomes gradually, and ultimately overwhelmingly non-believer, and believers become increasingly isolated. In contrast, for example, there is a group of Flat-Earthers large enough to sustain a sense of belonging. Belief is a collective affair.
The mechanisms behind the transition also illustrate differences. The most prominent one, testimony from others, seems a lot less effective to shift adult beliefs – it's not as if there is a lack of testimony asserting, for example, the efficacy of vaccines or the veracity of the moon landing. One explanation for this difference is that we don't just accept testimony from anyone. Even if there is plenty of evidence that children have tribal instincts (the music they like, the football teams they support), belief or disbelief in Santa cuts across any such groupings, and testimony will eventually come from members from their tribe. In adults, however, peer groups of great relevance to the individual are often defined by the beliefs, and testimony from outsiders is ignored and dismissed.
Why might the discovery of conclusive contradicting evidence or reasoning fail to facilitate the questioning of false beliefs in adults? In most children, these mechanisms almost always co-existed with testimony acting as a trigger. But adults tend to live in belief bubbles in which one is insulated from testimony or where it is positively rejected. This suppresses any preparedness to consider contradicting evidence (let alone actively looking for it) or to engage in critical reasoning.
In children, promotion of Santa by the parents – people in authority – was found to be a factor in the sustaining of the belief for longer. Belief bubbles often play the same role: communication between believers, and from authoritative figures (such as celebrities) is a constant reinforcing influence. At the same time, this also strengthens the (anticipated) negative emotions associated with abandoning the belief – and the safe and comfortable bubble that embodies it.
But perhaps the most significant difference is that, for children, belief in Santa is not part of their identity. The beliefs we hold as adults, from our religious faiths and our political allegiances, to the convictions we hold regarding climate change, complementary medicine or spiritism, often are, and very strongly so.
If questioning a belief means questioning our identity, the chances that we will revise it are slim.
No comments:
Post a Comment