Cognition And Development Flashcards
How does Piaget think children’s thinking develops?
Through schemas
Schemas
Innate evolving units of knowledge in which we use ti understand and respond to situations. Schemas develop through age and encountering different situations
Adaptation
The process in which a child’s schemas are developed to fit with their experience of the world 2 types, assimilation and accomodation
Accomodation
Changing an existing schema or creating a new one, occurs when info doesn’t fit into an existing schema
Assimilation
Information being added to an existing schema
Equillibrium
Piaget states that motivation is essential for learning, equilibrium drives our need for adaptation. If an experience cannot be assimilated it creates an unpleasant imbalance. People attempt to reinstate equilibrium (motivation to learn) so that info can be dealt with
Piaget’s theory A03- teaching
P: Piaget’s research has revolutionised teaching
E: activity oriented learning is widely used across classrooms as well as children being involved un actively constructing their knowledge. In particular, early years classrooms use Piaget’s research to focus learning on play
E: this is a strength because his theory has had a positive impact on education as teachers continue to provide active learning opportunities
Piaget’s theory A03- vygotsky
P: Piaget underestimated the role of other psychologist’s research
E: Piaget believes that teachers are important to aid discovery, however Vygotsky argues that learning is a more social process and other children are essential to an individual. He also suggest that advances in learning is only accessible with experts helping
E: this challenges Piaget, suggesting his explanation is limited
Piaget theory A03- equillibrium
P: the role of equilibrium may be overemphasised.
E: Piaget believed that children are motivated to remove disequilibrium. However, he only studies children from middle class families who may have had more motivation.
E: his theory lacks validity as equilibrium is central to his theory and may not apply to all children
Sensorimotor stage
0-2 years, key schema of object permanence formed at around 8 months
Object pernamence
Knowing an object still exists when not in view, which requires the ability to form mental representations objects
Piaget research object pernamence vs critical research
Piaget:
Toy hidden under blanket while child was watching and they observed whether child would look for the toy, he found that children would search at 8 months
Bower and Wishart:
They turned light out so toy was not visible and watched on infrared camera. The children (1-4 months) searched for up to 90 seconds after, showing Piaget underestimated abilities
Pre-operational stage
2-7 years, develop class inclusion and are egocentric
Class inclusion
The ability to understand an object can belong to more than one category
Egocentrism
Only seeing the world from your point of view
Piaget research egocentrism vs critical research
Piaget:
Three mountains task, child given pictures from different points of view and a doll was sat at one end of the table. The child was asked which perspective the doll would see. They found that 4 year olds picked their own view of the model, 6 year olds picked a different point of view but not always correctly, and 7 year olds correctly selected the photo, showing they decentered at the end of this stage.
Donaldson:
There was a 4 wall cross model, and the policeman doll was placed in different positions as well as a boy doll. The child was asked if the policeman could see the doll, and 90% of 3.5-5 year olds correctly understood both viewpoints
Piaget research class inclusion vs critical research
Piaget:
Showed a picture of dogs and cats and asked ‘are there more dogs or animals in the photo’ and they could’t answer correctly until concrete operational
Donaldson:
Said Piaget’s task was hard to understand, when he showed 6 year old children 4 cows, 3 black 1 white all on their side asleep. When asked if there were more black cows or sleeping cows 48% answered correctly
Conservation
The ability to understand that redistributing material does not affect its mass, number or volume
Piaget research conservation vs critical research
Piaget:
Child shown two rows of 6 beads of equal length and asked if the rows have the same number of beads in them. They are then spread out and question repeated, preoperational child will say spread out row has more beads
Mcgarrigle and Donaldson:
Naughty teddy destroyed one of the rows and 60% of 6y/o could answer correctly
Conrete operational stage
7-11 years old, can conserve and decentre. These are all concrete operations, they can only be applied to real physical objects. They cannot think about abstract ideas.
Formal operational stage
11+ years can apply operations to hypothetical and abstract situations
Piaget’s stages A03- underestimating OP
P:Piaget has often been criticised for underestimating children’s abilities.
E:There has been critical research to suggest this, which entailed turning a light out as opposed to hiding a toy and using infrared cameras to see if they looked for the toy. This method was used because it was suggested that children were believed that they were forbidden from using the toy.
E:This research found that children did acquire object permanence earlier than Piaget theorised. This shows that object permanence could occur earlier than suggested
Piaget’s stages A03- unfamiliar task
P:This research study has been accused of being a confusing and unfamiliar task for children, which may have presented a co-founding variable for the results.
E:The policeman doll study was set up to determine whether Piaget yet again underestimated. There was a 4 wall cross model, and the policeman doll was placed in different positions as well as a boy doll. The child was asked if the policeman could see the doll, and 90% of 3.5-5 year olds correctly understood both viewpoints.
E:This contradicts Piaget’s idea that children in this stage are egocentric and shows that children can decentre at an age where they understand the situational.
Piaget’s stages A03- autism
P:Piagets idea that stages are universal and that development is a single process can be criticised. E:Studies that include children with autism suggests that children with this disorder may develop independently as many autistic children are very egocentric, however they develop language and reasoning normally.
E:This suggests that Piagets theory that stages are one universal development may lack validity.
Vygotsky- what did his theory focus on
Cognitive development being a social process of learning from others with experience
Zone of proximal development (ZPD)
The gap between what a child can do alone and what they can do with assistance from others. Different children have different ZPDs, if it is bigger they require more help.
Scaffolding
All types of help that a child can be given to help reduce the ZPD. It is decreased over time as the ZPD decreases. Eg peer tutoring or working through egs
Varies culturally, the tools relate to the social and work environments of that specific culture
Peer tutoring
Where children with more knowledge (expert) help a child with a larger ZPD (novice). Most effective when ZPDs are similar
Vygotsky A03- roazzi and bryant
P: research evidence for the ZPD
E: Roazzi and Bryant found that 4-5 year olds performed better on a ‘number of sweets’ challenge when working with peers offering support than alone. This demonstrated that children can develop more advanced reasoning skills when working with more expert people.
E: this therefore supports the ZPD as a developmental concept
Vygotsky A03- conor and cross
P: research evidence for scaffolding
E: conor and cross observed 45 children at intervals between 16-54 months, finding mothers used less direct intervention as children developed. This shows how the level of help given by an expert declines over time by the process of scaffolding
E: this supports vygotsky’s claim that scaffolding is a good description of the process by which children move through the ZPD
Vygotsky A03- assumes learning is universal
P:vygotsky assumes that the process of learning is universal amd the same for all children.
E: Some children may not effectively learn through social situations, and the personality/ and disorders a child may have should bne taken into account to explain their different cognitive development. This may be due to cultural differences in social cues or interaction, or a child with autism may struggle more in social learning environments due to being more egocentric.
E:This means vygotskys therot may not be applicable to all children.
Baillargeon’s explanation of early infant abilities initial belief
Suggested infants in the sensorimotor stage did not reach for the toy because they didn’t have the motor skills to pursue a hidden object or just lost interest. Baillargeon believed Piaget underestimated
Physical reasoning system
The innate capacity to understand the physical world that becomes more sophisticated over time. Object persistence is one of the abilities of the PRS
Violation of expectation (VOE)
An approach to investigating infant knowledge of the world. The idea is that if children understand how the physical world operates then they will expect certain things to happen in particular situations.
Baillargeon and Graber VOE research
Method- 24 infants aged 5-6 months were shown a short or tall rabbit passing the window. Two conditions, possible and impossible condition. Possible was the tall rabbit can be seen passing the window but not short. Impossible was neither rabbit appeared.
Results- infants in impossible looked for mean of 33.07s but 25.11 in possible. This was interpreted as the infants being suprised at the impossible condition which is why they looked longer.
Conclusion- shows children have an understanding of OP at 6months
Baillargeon A03- better than Piaget
P: baillargeon’s VOE research was a better way to test infant understanding than Piaget’s
E: Piaget’s investigated OP through recording if they reached for a toy that had been covered. However, failure to reach may have indicated losing attention or thinking it was forbidden rather than a lack of OP
E: Baillargeon’s research removed these cofounding variables so we can be more confident in the validity of her findings
Baillargeon A03- used inference
P: Baillargeon’s VOE research used inference to judge infant’s understanding
E: she inferred/assumed that looking longer at the impossible event showed surprise because what they expected to happen did not happen. There may have been other reasons they looked longer
E: this means Baillargeon’s conclusions about infant’s understanding of the physical world may be incorrect
Baillargeon A03- research support
P: additional research evidence to support Baillargeon’s explanations of infant’s physical reasoning
E: Gibson and Walk found 92% of babies aged 6-14 months refused to cross a ‘visual cliff’ suggesting they understood depth perception
E: this backs up the idea that infants have a better understanding of the physical world than was previously believed
How does Selman challenge Piaget’s theory of cognitive
Social cognition is separate to domain-general cognitive development unlike Piaget’s suggestion that it all occurs at the same time
Social cognition
Describes mental processes we make use of when engaged in social interaction, eg making decisions on how to behave based on our understanding of a social situation.
Social perspective-taking
Understanding what someone else is thinking/feeling, being able to appreciate a social situation from someone else’s point of view.
Selman’s perspective taking research
30 boys and girls, 20 aged each 4,5 and 6. He asked the children to take different roles in the social situation and consider how each person felt. One scenario involved a child (Holly) who promised her father that she won’t climb trees, but she comes across a friend whose kitten is stuck up a tree. The ppts were asked to explain how each person would feel if Holly did not climb the tree. Selman found stages of roles
Stage 0- egocentric or undifferentiated perspective
3-6 years, children are unaware of any perspective other than their own. Cannot distinguish between their own emotions from others
Stage 1- social-informational role taking
6-8 years, children recognise that others have perspective that differ from their own and recognise that others have different perspectives only because they have received other info
Stage 2- self-reflective role taking
8-10 years, children know that their own and other’s points of view may conflict even when they receive the same information, cannot consider more than one viewpoint at a time
Stage 3- mutual role taking
10-12 years, children can consider their own and another’s points of view and the other person can do the same. Child can assume perspective of a disinterested third person and how they will react to the viewpoint of others
Stage 4- social and conventional role taking
12+, child can understand another person’s perspective through comparing it to the society in which they live. Chid expects others to take viewpoint of most of the people in their social group to keep order.
Selman A03- research evidence Selman
P: there is research evidence that perspective taking gets better with age
E: Selman gave perspective taking tasks to 60 children and found a significant positive correlation between age and ability to take different perspectives. Longitudinal follow up studies have shown that perspective taking develops with age for each child
E: strength because Selman’s ideas are supported by different types of research
Selman A03- applications in atypical development
P: there are applications in understanding atypical development
E: research has shown that children with ADHD or autism have problems with perspective taking. Eg Morten compared 50 8-12 year old children with a diagnosis of ADHD with a control group on performance on perspective taking tasks like the ones that Selman used. Those with ADHD did worse identifying different feelings for the people involved.
E: strength because it shows it is helpful in understanding issues with social cognition in atypical development
Theory of mind definition
Understanding what others are thinking or feeling. Researchers are concerned with what age we develop this
What age is it thought we develop ToM
4-5 years old
Methods to test ToM- intentional reasoning tasks definition
Test whether children sucessfully understand and can explain the motives, beliefs and thoughts which cause others to perform certain actions
Intentional reasoning tasks- Meltzoff
18 month old children observed adults placing beads into a jar
Experimental condition: adult struggled to place beads in the jar and dropped them.
Control condition: adults placed beads into jar sucessfully, when children were asked to place beads into the jar, they dropped no more beads than in the experimental condition
Shows they were imitating what the adult intended to do, showing early age ToM
Eyes task
Baron-Cohen: involved reading complex emotions of faces by just showing their eyes. Cohen found adults with high functioning autism and Asperger’s struggled with the eye task. This supports ToM as a possible cause of ASD
False belief tasks
Developed to test whether children can understand that people can believe something that is not true
Sally-Anne experiment
Procedure: 20 children with autism in experimental group and in control group was 14 with down syndrome and 27 with no diagnosis. They were told a story about 2 dolls and asked ‘where will sally look for the marble’
Results: 85% of control group said correctly but only 20% in experimental group
This suggests deficits in ToM may explain ASD disorders
Evaluations of Sally-Anne
- cannot explain desireable characteristics of ASD suffers such as advanced numerical reasoning. Limited explanation
- if the test is through acting, visual learners may have an advantage over auditory or kinaesthetic learners
A03 ToM- low validity for false belief tasks
P: low validity of false belief tasks
E: children may fail false belief tasks like the Sally-Anne study, not only due to deficits of ToM but also other cognitive reasons eg forgetting the story. (Eye study - in real life we use other cues such as facial expressions and body language to understand ToM)
E: this suggests false belief tasks may not be the best way to assess ToM
A03 ToM- partial explanation for autism
P: it is a partial explanation for autism
E: ToM has been useful in helping us understand deficits associated with autism. However it cannot explain other characteristics associated with autism, such as superior visual attention or LTM
E: this suggests ToM cannot explain all features of autism
A03 ToM- we do not know how ToM develops
P: there is no clear understanding of how ToM develps
E: there are a number of theories around to account for how we develop our ToM, for example vygotsky says is learnt, Piaget says it is innate
E: there is no clear explanation of which one is correct
The mirror neurone system
Consists of special brain cells caused mirror neurones distributed in several areas of the brain. These fire in response to action on the part of others.
Rizzolati- discovery mirror neurones
Studied electrical activity in monkey’s motor cortex (controls movement). One researcher reached for his lunch (in the monkey’s view) and the monkey’s motor cortex became activated the same way as it did when it reached for food itself. They called these mirror neurones distributed
Mirror neurones and perspective taking
They are important in social cognition, eg ToM and perspective taking. If they fire in response to others’ actions and intentions, they may give us neural mechanism for experiencing and understanding people’s perspectives
Mirror neurones and ASD
Ramachandran et al found evidence for neurological deficits involving mirror neurones as a potential explanation for ASD
- a faulty mirror neurone system (they named it broken mirror neurone hypothesis)
- this leads to problems in social communication, awkwardness and manifests itself as adults who struggle to ‘read’ others and mimic less adult behaviour.
Researchers have found children who are later diagnosed with ASD typically mimic adult behaviour less than children with no diagnosis. This may indicate issues with the mirror neurone system
A03 mirror neurones- Haker yawning
P: There is research evidence to support the role of mirror neurons.
E: Haker et al. (2012) demonstrated how an area of the brain that is rich in mirror neurons is involved in contagious yawning (an example of human empathy). Participants’ brain activity was measured using MRI, while they watched a film showing other people yawning. When they yawned in response, the Brodmann’s area, (an area in the right frontal lobe and believed to be rich in mirror neurons) was activated.
E: This supports the idea that mirror neurons are involved in social cognition
A03 mirror neurones- hard to study
P:A criticism of motor neuron research is it is difficult to study them
in humans.
E: Evidence for mirror neuron activity comes from brain scans, such as MRI. These techniques do not allow us to measure activity within individual brain cells and for ethical reasons it is not appropriate to insert electrodes into the human brain to measure activity on the cellular level.
E: This is a significant weakness of mirror neuron research as researchers are often measuring activity in a part of the brain and inferring that this is linked to activity in mirror neurons. This may not be correct
A03 mirror neurones- evidence for ASD
P:There is research support for mirror neurons explaining
autism.
E: Mirror neuron abnormalities may explain why people with autism generally have deficits in social cognition like TOM. For example, Dapretto et al. (2006) used brain-scanning techniques to observe parts of the brain used by autistic and non-autistic children when observing faces that displayed anger, fear, happiness, sadness or no emotion. The only difference identified was that the participants with autism showed reduced activity in areas the brain that have been identified as part of the motor neuron system.
E: However, not all research findings in this area are clear.
