Blissfully Unaware: Why Children Often Act Before They Think

Kids may lack self-consciousness because a key network in their brain is not yet synchronized

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

If two men began a boisterous tug-of-war over the wine list at a posh restaurant, more than a few heads would turn. Yet two six-year-old kids quarreling over a pack of crayons at a diner would hardly seem unusual. It is normal for kindergartners to act out and for grown-ups to show restraint. But social pressure alone cannot explain why adults are so much better at thinking before they act and recognizing how others view them.

According to a new study, the development of social awareness and the introspection it requires may be linked to the development of the default network, a group of regions in the brain that are active when our mind is wandering instead of focused. The research, presented in November at the annual meeting of the Society for Neuroscience, suggests this network is not fully coordinated until around the age of 13.

Neuroscientist Stuart Washington of Georgetown University Medical Center asked 42 participants aged six to 27 to stay inside a functional MRI scanner and play a simple game, searching groups of arrows for one pointing in a different direction from the rest. But the researchers were not interested in brain activity during the active task—they wanted to observe the brain during periods of rest between tasks. In the past decade scientists have a discovered that a particular network of brain regions consistently stirs to life whenever people are at wakeful rest inside fMRI machines, not focusing on anything in particular. Studies have tied this default network to daydreaming [see “Living in a Dream World”], introspection, moral reasoning, thinking of the future and the ability to see the world through others’ eyes.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


When Washington compared the activity of the default network in people of different ages, he found a clear pattern. The older the participant, the more synchronized the interaction of the default network’s five primary nodes, which are spread throughout the brain. Children aged six to nine showed hardly any synchronized communication in the default network. But by 13 years of age, the participants began to demonstrate neural coordination typical of an adult.

“Our results imply that children are less able than teens and adults to comprehend the consequences of their actions, think about future events or realistically gauge how other people view their actions,” Washington explains. “Since these behavioral attributes are not fully formed in children, they are more likely to make rash decisions that do not account for consequences or other people’s perceptions.” So the next time you are stuck in earshot of squabbling youngsters, try to pardon their lack of consideration. They probably have not yet been able to imagine themselves as others see them.

Ferris Jabr is a contributing writer for Scientific American. He has also written for the New York Times Magazine, the New Yorker and Outside.

More by Ferris Jabr
SA Mind Vol 22 Issue 1This article was published with the title “Blissfully Unaware: Why Children Often Act Before They Think” in SA Mind Vol. 22 No. 1 (), p. 14
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0311-14a

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe