Developmental 2: Samuel And Bryant

Question 0

What was the aim?

Answer 0

To show Piaget’s method of repeating the question was flawed.
To show that children under the age of 7 could conserve.

Question 1

What was the background?

Answer 1

Jean Piaget= children’s thought processes genetically differ to adults

1. Sensorimotor (some)= interaction
2. Pre-operational (people)= egocentric (unable to see other perspectives) cannot conserve under 7
3. Concrete operational(can) = conserve
4. Formal operational (fart)= logic+reasoning

Question 2

What see the IVs and DVs?

Answer 2

IV:

1. Age
2. Type of questioning (1, 2, none)
3. Type of task (mass, volume, number)

DV: whether child conserves

Question 3

Who were the PPs?

How were they split?

Answer 3

252 boys and girls from Devon

1. 63 5 years and 3 months
   21 standard (2Q), 21 1Q, 21 fixed array
   Volume (4) mass (4) number (4)
   12 q’s per PP counterbalanced
2. 63 6 years and 3 months
3. 63 7 years and 3 months
4. 63 8 years and 3 months

Question 4

What was the experimental design?

Answer 4

Matched pairs= age
Independent= used different children in each condition
Repeated measures= completed 4 times each

Question 5

What were the 3 conditions?

Answer 5

1. PIAGET= standard, asked twice
   •Child asked q and answers
   •Sees transformation
   •Asked same q
2. ONE Q
   •Child sees transformation
   •Asked q
3. FIXED ARRAY
   •Child sees transformed object after been changed
   •Then asked q

Question 6

What were the conclusions (4)?

Answer 6

1. Highest age had least errors
   •Standard= 1.7/12
   •1Q= 1.3/12
2. Children under 7 can conserve
   5+3 months
   •Standard= 8.5/12
   •1Q= 7.3/12

3. Piaget's method flawed, 1Q highest
•5+3m= 7.3/12
•6+3m= 4.3/12
•7+3m= 2.6/12
•8+3m= 1.3/12

4. Number test easiest
   •Standard= 1.476
   •1Q= 1.024
   •FA= 1.536

Question 7

What were the controls?

Answer 7

• counterbalancing= no order effects
• individual completing of task
• same materials for each child
• same q’s for each condition

Question 8

What are some evaluations?

Answer 8

✔️high reliability as repeated 4 times
✔️large sample= high reliability
✔️influential in education (curriculum)

✖️numbers= kids counted counters
✖️validity questioned= lab exp so children nervous+low attention span
✖️low Eco v

Question 9

What are some possible improvements?

Answer 9

1. Covert during a lesson= ^ Eco v
2. Over period of time= previous answers do not affect given
3. Exchange numbers task for another

Question 10

How were the tasks carried out?

Answer 10

MASS:
•2 identical playdoh cylinders
•1 squished to sausage/pancake shape

VOLUME:
•2 identical glasses with same amount
•1 poured into narrow/wider glass

NUMBER:
•2 rows of 6 corresponding counters
•1 bunched up/spread out