Cd Week 6 Flashcards
Article of perseveration error, in infants
Not necessarily due to memory, or recency, or inhibitory lacking, but in fact a distinction between a learned teaching response in the a b error, and one of a hide and seek episodic. Simply put social cognition is developing at 1 year and ostensively referential interaction biases baby. Previous research and arguments may to be quite correct.
What is object permanence and what is its developmental trajectory?
When children can track where an object is/may be when not perceptible ie out of sight.
1-4 months, cannot do it, need to be seen, out of sight out of mind.
4-8m partially concealed can locate, still not op
8-12 rely on behaviour, believe they control where it is, look where it was last found, not where it disappeared. Do not see it independant of self Anotb error.
Invisible displacements stump 1-1.5yrs do not look behind barrier
Only around 1.5-2 yrs do kids have op,
Summary chapter on conceptual dev. Debunking Piaget
Could be dynamic, memory or experiential context dependant, in preserver strive learning of object permanence,
Many interesting studies present, mom mirrors, trans, novel toy if seen but familiar if dark.
Older long distraction time possible, more memory.
Configuration q, color
Physical cue, support
Experience, knowledge
Study
Zero training, no results.
With experience, use it to distinguish togethor box.
Box with pattern dif. Than in trial. They do not seem to care. With 4 month old.
Use config, no dif,
Physical, experience, prefer, togethor, novel.
So train with many dif boxes.
T>A
Conclude: kids use configuration all cues, tell difference between these boxes. Use experiential info to segregate objects.
Rely on seeing one object before trial to determine ideas of objects in trial.
Form categories commonalities among boxes, think it is also seperate. But 1 example did not do it. Make prediction of stand along.
Specific object info, and generic evidence, with enough familiarity.
Kids being able to use different cues.
use experiential objects.
With specific objects and general category
What are kids doing with objects?
Cover object, –> failure to search until 8 months-9
Out of sight out of mind, lack object permanence.
Not quite right, attention ceases, memory forget, means end problem, two steps too many.
Studies disprove problems of object permanence Piaget
Ballargeon
Rotating screen study
Should stop hitting box, but flat to flow should be surprising.
Rotating screen. 4.5 months old are surprised. When flat to the ground.
Seem to know something, understand over continues to exist even though out of sight.
B/devos 1991
Ramp study.
Ramp, fly out other side, younger than 8th months. (3.5 months old.)
Box in from or behind , impediment, then cover
When impediment is there in the way, look longer.
Conclude: Shows object permanence.
Seem to know blocking. Using depth.
So have object perm, but sometimes cannot act or respond to hiding.
3 month old bailer ton study.
Like carrot study,
Don’t see it pass through window, expediting it to pass through,
Means child is thinking object has constant trajectory, expereince shows should see it in window. Object perm continue to exist. See in depth, additionally, when something not blocking it, should be able to see it! Continuity
Violates expectation when does not happen.
Are surprised.
Therfore conclude,
Can track trajectory, have depth, object perm, know continuity (in time)
Shown Piaget object perm 8-9 but
Other studies show do in fact know something about the objects
In addition to failure to search, Piaget found, a not b error. By around 9 months,
Kids do this because? Ideas: learn weigh evidence, fail to take into account new info.
Probs, learning, memory
Baillergeaon study 1987
Memory of a not be error
Remember over delay with object out of view,
Delays of 15, 30. 70 sec.
Always retrieve object. Using barrier hide under table.
Kids we always suprised when came out wrong side!
No MATTER time, so memory not an issue.
But not as complex as a not b things.
Reaching issue, does involve time as other studies show though.
Topal a not b search reading artice
Earning mechanism and communication. Issues in a not b error.
Ten month olds
Oc, nc, ns
Ostensively communication, standard interaction, influences kids expectation, induces learning pattern. NOt relying on episodic. General knowledge instead. (Usually how we interact with kids)
Non communicative, facing away, no interaction.
Non sociaL, no experimenter
3a 4b
Kids only in oc high errors, less in others. Ns lowest.
Conclude, socail cues play a part generalized knowledge.
Ball agternoon reading
Shows us a developmental trajectory infants unlike Piaget, rely on dichotic variable, them discrete, thns continuous, not generalized, not inversions and therefore not occuring at same ages. More research to be done with bugs, screen,s unveiling, collision, and support, to determine, learning and observation time required and age of onset.
Class demo, switch out person explaining, saw happening, goofy job.
Recognize person switch, university
Only 50% notice. Crazy, become different person fail tom notice w
Pay attention to guide them,
Not to specific details, distracted,
Memory depends on attention to.
Dan summons. CHANGE BLINDNESS
Encoded other info, not other info.
Normal circumstances, doesn’t pay attention to cues of personl
Like gorilla screen guy
Point for class: could be representing or not as adults.
So are kids doing similar thing. Are they representaing lots info, are they selective like adults, what makes them be selective.
