Abstract
We hypothesized that children's reliance on adults' testimony regarding food choices would diminish when adults were shown to be unreliable informants by expressing liking for foods the children disliked. In three studies, 3-6-year-old children observed an adult expressing liking for food and non-food items that were either the same as or opposite the child's stated hedonic assessments. Even after having observed an adult express liking for stimuli the children disliked, children still selected the item which the adult identified as hedonically positive. Children were more likely to select the stimulus identified as hedonically positive by the adult when the stimulus was food (as opposed to non-food), and when the adult's hedonic assessment was provided as an absolute ("I think this is yummy.") as opposed to a comparative statement ("I like this one better."). The results imply that an adult's identification of a food as hedonically positive serves as an important guide to children's food selection, even when children recognize that adults have very different hedonic assessments of foods from themselves. Providing information to children that a food is palatable in absolute terms also appears to shape children's food selection more powerfully than providing the information in comparative terms.