Developmental Psychology Flashcards
Study: Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development
Researchers: Jean Piaget
Aim: To understand how children’s thinking develops through distinct stages.
Method: Observational and experimental research with children.
Participants: Children of various ages, including Piaget’s own children.
Procedure: Tasks like the conservation task, the three-mountain task, and object permanence tests were used to identify stages of cognitive development.
Results: Identified four stages: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational.
Conclusion: Cognitive development progresses through a sequence of stages, driven by maturation and interaction with the environment.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Pioneering theory with significant educational applications.
Limitations: Underestimated children’s abilities; lacks consideration of sociocultural influences.
Study: Baillargeon (1986) Testing Object Permanence
Researchers: Renée Baillargeon
Aim: To investigate whether infants as young as 3.5 months understand object permanence.
Method: Experimental (violation-of-expectation paradigm).
Participants: Infants aged 3.5-4.5 months.
Procedure: Infants were shown a drawbridge that either stopped when blocked by an object (possible event) or appeared to pass through the object (impossible event).
Results: Infants looked longer at the impossible event, suggesting they understood the object continued to exist.
Conclusion: Infants have a more sophisticated understanding of object permanence than Piaget suggested.
Evaluation:
Strengths: More sensitive methods; supports nativist perspectives.
Limitations: Interpretation of infant behavior is indirect and may not conclusively prove object permanence.
Study: Samuel & Bryant (1984) Testing Conservation
Researchers: Samuel and Bryant
Aim: To test children’s ability to understand conservation and critique Piaget’s methods.
Method: Experimental. Participants: 252 children aged 5-8 years.
Procedure: Tested conservation of number, mass, and volume using one-question and two-question conditions (modifying Piaget’s original design).
Results: Children performed better in the one-question condition, suggesting Piaget’s method may have confused them.
Conclusion: Piaget underestimated children’s conservation abilities; task design affects performance.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Highlights methodological issues in Piaget’s work.
Limitations: Cultural and contextual factors not addressed.
Study: Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory of Cognitive Development
Researchers: Lev Vygotsky
Aim: To explain the role of culture and social interaction in cognitive development.
Method: Theoretical framework based on observations.
Participants: Observations of children interacting with adults and peers.
Procedure: Vygotsky emphasized the importance of tools (language) and the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD), where learning occurs through guided interaction.
Results: Social interaction and scaffolding facilitate learning within the ZPD.
Conclusion: Cognitive development is a socially mediated process influenced by culture.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Recognizes cultural diversity in development; highlights the role of language.
Limitations: Vague on developmental stages; less empirical evidence compared to Piaget.
Study: Nicholls (1969) Social/Collaborative Learning
Researchers: John Nicholls
Aim: To explore how group interaction influences learning outcomes.
Method: Experimental.
Participants: School-aged children in collaborative learning settings.
Procedure: Children worked in groups to solve problems or complete tasks. Performance was compared with individual efforts.
Results: Collaborative learning improved problem-solving and fostered deeper understanding.
Conclusion: Social interaction enhances cognitive development through shared knowledge.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Supports Vygotsky’s ZPD concept.
Limitations: Results may vary with group dynamics or cultural norms.
Study: Connor & Cross (2003) Scaffolding
Researchers: Connor and Cross
Aim: To examine changes in scaffolding behavior over time.
Method: Longitudinal study.
Participants: Parents and their preschool-aged children.
Procedure: Parent-child interactions were observed during problem-solving tasks over a two-year period.
Results: Scaffolding decreased as children gained independence, showing adaptive teaching strategies.
Conclusion: Effective scaffolding is dynamic and tailored to the child’s development.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Longitudinal design captures developmental changes.
Limitations: Limited generalisability; primarily observational.
Study: Theory of Neuroplasticity
Researchers: Various, based on collective research.
Aim: To explore the brain’s ability to adapt and reorganize itself.
Method: Includes experimental studies, imaging techniques (e.g., fMRI).
Participants: Varied (e.g., stroke patients, children, musicians).
Procedure: Studies observed changes in brain structure/function after experiences or injuries.
Results: The brain forms new neural connections in response to learning or damage.
Conclusion: Neuroplasticity underpins learning and recovery.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Broad empirical support.
Limitations: Still lacks clarity on limits of neuroplasticity.
Study: Chugani (1999) Brain Development in Infants and Young Children
Researchers: Harry Chugani
Aim: To investigate patterns of brain development during infancy and early childhood.
Method: PET scans to study glucose metabolism in the brain.
Participants: Infants and young children.
Procedure: PET scans were performed to measure brain activity based on glucose uptake, identifying regions with high metabolic activity.
Results: Newborns showed high activity in the brainstem and thalamus, responsible for survival functions. Increased activity in the cerebral cortex was observed as the children aged, reflecting higher cognitive development.
Conclusion: Brain development follows a hierarchical sequence, starting with basic survival functions and progressing to more complex cognitive abilities.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Empirical evidence for neurodevelopmental patterns; application in understanding developmental disorders.
Limitations: PET scans involve exposure to radiation; ethical concerns with infant participants.
Study: Giedd (2004) Brain Structure in Developing Children
Researchers: Jay N. Giedd
Aim: To examine structural changes in the brain during childhood and adolescence.
Method: Longitudinal study using MRI scans.
Participants: 145 children and adolescents aged 4-22 years.
Procedure: Participants underwent repeated MRI scans over a 10-year period to track brain development.
Results: The prefrontal cortex showed significant growth during adolescence, peaking in volume around 11 for girls and 12 for boys before pruning occurred. Gray matter decreased, while white matter increased, reflecting greater efficiency in neural connections.
Conclusion: Adolescence is a critical period for brain development, with significant structural changes linked to cognitive and emotional maturation.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Non-invasive imaging technique; provides insights into age-related brain changes.
Limitations: Limited generalizability due to sample size and demographic focus; correlational, not causal.
Study: Coie & Dodge (1988) – Children’s Sociometric Status
Researchers: John Coie and Kenneth Dodge
Aim: To examine children’s peer relationships and classify their sociometric status based on popularity and rejection.
Method: Sociometric analysis through peer nomination surveys.
Participants: School-aged children in classroom settings.
Procedure: Children were asked to nominate classmates they liked most and least. Based on the nominations, children were classified into five sociometric categories: popular, rejected, neglected, controversial, and average.
Results:
~Popular children were well-liked and had strong social skills.
~Rejected children were actively disliked, often due to aggression or withdrawal.
~Neglected children received few nominations but were not disliked.
~Controversial children received both high likes and dislikes, showing mixed social behaviors.
~Average children received moderate numbers of nominations.
Conclusion: Peer acceptance or rejection significantly impacts social development, influencing self-esteem, behavior, and future relationships.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Provides a framework for understanding peer relationships and their impact.
Limitations: Sociometric categories may oversimplify complex social dynamics; cultural variations not addressed.
Study: Hoffman & Russ (2012) – Pretend Play, Creativity, and Emotion Regulation in Children
Researchers: Jamie Hoffman and Sandra Russ
Aim: To examine the relationship between pretend play, creativity, and emotion regulation in children.
Method: Correlational study using play tasks and standardized tests.
Participants: 113 children aged 6-10 years.
Procedure: Children engaged in pretend play tasks and completed measures of emotional expression and divergent thinking. Emotion regulation was assessed through observational coding and parent reports.
Results: Pretend play was positively correlated with creativity and effective emotion regulation. Children who engaged in more elaborate and imaginative play displayed better emotional control and problem-solving skills.
Conclusion: Pretend play contributes to emotional and cognitive development, fostering creativity and emotion regulation.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Highlights the developmental importance of play; practical implications for education.
Limitations: Correlational design prevents causal conclusions; limited age range of participants.
Study: Rutter (2007) – Long-Term Effects of Deprivation in Romanian Orphans
Researchers: Michael Rutter et al.
Aim: To investigate the impact of early deprivation on cognitive and emotional development.
Method: Longitudinal study.
Participants: 165 Romanian orphans adopted into the UK, compared to 52 non-deprived UK adoptees.
Procedure: Children were assessed at ages 4, 6, 11, and 15 on cognitive, emotional, and social measures.
Results:
~Children adopted before 6 months had similar development to UK adoptees.
~Children adopted after 6 months showed deficits in attachment, attention, and social functioning.
~Some deficits persisted into adolescence.
Conclusion: Early deprivation can have long-term effects on development, but recovery is possible if deprivation ends early.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Comprehensive longitudinal data; highlights the importance of early intervention.
Limitations: Limited generalizability beyond Romanian orphans; ethical concerns regarding follow-up assessments.
Study: Klasen (2010) – Posttraumatic Resilience in Former Ugandan Child Soldiers
Researchers: Fritz Klasen et al.
Aim: To explore factors influencing resilience in former child soldiers exposed to trauma.
Method: Mixed-methods study using interviews and standardized psychological tests.
Participants: 330 former Ugandan child soldiers aged 11-17.
Procedure: Participants completed assessments on trauma exposure, PTSD symptoms, and resilience factors such as social support and community reintegration.
Results:
~Social support and education were significant predictors of resilience.
~High PTSD symptoms were linked to lack of social support and continued marginalization.
Conclusion: Resilience is enhanced by social support, education, and successful reintegration into the community.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Focuses on cultural and contextual factors; practical applications for post-conflict rehabilitation.
Limitations: Self-report measures may be biased; limited generalizability to other contexts.
Study: Rosenzweig, Bennett & Diamond (1972) – Enriched/Impoverished Environments Affecting Brain Structure
Researchers: Mark Rosenzweig, David Krech, Edward Bennett, and Marian Diamond
Aim: To investigate how environmental factors influence brain plasticity in rats.
Method: Experimental.
Participants: Laboratory rats.
Procedure: Rats were randomly assigned to enriched or impoverished environments for 30-60 days. Their brains were then examined post-mortem for structural differences.
Results: Rats in enriched environments had thicker cerebral cortices and increased dendritic branching compared to rats in impoverished conditions.
Conclusion: Environmental stimulation enhances brain plasticity, leading to structural and functional changes.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Strong experimental design; foundational study for neuroplasticity.
Limitations: Animal study limits generalizability to humans; ethical concerns regarding animal treatment.
Study: McDermott et al. (2019) – MRI Scans of SES Affecting Brain Region Development
Researchers: McDermott and colleagues
Aim: To explore how socioeconomic status (SES) influences brain development in children.
Method: Correlational study using MRI scans.
Participants: 1,099 children aged 3-20 from diverse SES backgrounds.
Procedure: MRI scans measured brain volume, focusing on regions like the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex. SES was assessed based on parental income and education.
Results:
~Lower SES was associated with reduced brain volume in areas linked to language, memory, and executive function.
~Stress and lack of resources mediated these differences.
Conclusion: SES significantly impacts brain development, with implications for cognitive and educational outcomes.
Evaluation:
Strengths: Large sample size; real-world relevance.
Limitations: Correlational design; does not account for genetic influences.
