Lecture 5: Mechanisms of Cognitive Change

Question 1

Information Processing

Answer 1

Receive information ->
internal processes transform/store information ->
act on information

Question 2

CHARACTERISTICS OF INFORMATION PROCESSING THEORIES OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT

Answer 2

 Thinking is information processing (computing
analogy)
 Precise analysis of change mechanisms
 Change produced by continuous process of selfmodification (monitoring)
 Much more emphasis on processing limitations and how they are overcome than considered by Piaget

Question 3

How does development occur?

Answer 3

 A linear progression of stages (Piaget)?
 Gradual development (Flavell)?
 How are new strategies incorporated? Do they always replace old strategies?

Question 4

Three strategies for fitting shapes

Answer 4

 Three potential strategies for fitting the shapes:
 Brute force
 Twist block to change the orientation
 Try a differently shaped hole
 These are distinct alternatives (i.e. they are not progressively complicated
 All can appear in one test session
 All are useful
 Each strategy has a different history of success

Question 5

Siegler’s theory

Answer 5

• several alternative strategies
• choose strategy with most success rather than causes failure
• each experience provides feedback
• strategy selection can be variable and inconsistent

Question 6

Overlapping waves model of cognitive development

Answer 6

• as child ages the strategy child uses differs
• strategy 5 most advanced
• strategy 4 and 2 used across whole spand, just different frequencies
• > strategy 4 competes with all of the other strategies at some point in development

Question 7

Primary school addition strategies

Answer 7

• Siegler and Shipley 1995
• strategies used to solve 3+5

Sum: Put up 3 fingers, put up 5 fingers, count fingers by saying “ 1, 2, 3, - 4, 5, 6, 7, 8”
Min: Say “5, 6, 7, 8” or “6, 7, 8”, perhaps simultaneously putting up one finger on each count beyond 5
Retrieval: Say an answer and explain it by saying “I just knew it”
Guessing: Say an answer and explain it by saying “I guessed”
Decomposition: Say “3 + 5 is like 4 + 4, so it’s 8” (change structure)

• what strategies do 5, 6 and 7 y/o prefer?
• 5 y/o: min, sum, guess or no response
• 6 y/o” retrieval, min
• 7y/o: retrieval, min
• as get older abandon some strategies
• > little change between 6 and 7
• > 5 to 6, less guess, less sum, more min and more retrieval

Question 8

Alternative strategies in arithmetic

-primary school addition strategies

Answer 8

-Geary 1990
If we take a simple addition problem: 9 + 3
 Some strategies will make more increasing demands on processing than others…

Easy, fast methods: 9 + 3 = 12
More demanding methods: 9, 10, 11, 12 and 9 + 3 is the
same as 10 + 2
Very demanding, error prone methods: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7,
8, 9, 10, 11, 12

 Strategy choice is adaptive
 Fastest methods on simple problems
 Effortful strategies used more for difficult problems where the strategy is necessary for accuracy
 Use a strategy most often where it works well
 Good example is the Min strategy
 Use when smaller addend is small and difference between addends is large: 9 + 2, child says “9,
10, 11”. Less likely to be used where errors are likely (e.g. 35 + 48).
 Strategy change over time is adaptive
 Simple addition – children use most efficient strategies (retrieval, counting)
 Spontaneously acquire new strategies such as decomposition

 Increase in processing speed (efficiency), working memory, and executive function are important (information processing theory says same thing)
 Scaffolding and tutoring can lead to change (older siblings)
 Children generate new strategies themselves
 Children generate new strategies themselves
 Trial-and-error
 Change component processes (substitute, vary order)
 Eliminate redundancy (remove part of process that is not actually needed)
 Feedback (success or failure)

Question 9

Monitoring of component process

-kitten delivery

Answer 9

-Fabricius 1988
-“ take all the kittens to the mummy cat and go the quick way”
-Evidence for monitoring sequence of components – child goes wrong way, says “whoops” and corrects
the mistake (in younger children)

• 4 years sighting
• 5 years planning

Question 10

Strategies for addition
-kindergarten, 1st and 2nd grade

Strategies for moral reasoning

Strategies for drawing map

Strategies for going down a ramp

And Siegler’s Theory

Answer 10

• Siegler 1999
• guess decreases
• retrieval increases
• min is up in 1st grade but less and kindergarten and second
• count all goes down
• decomposition stays fairly low ect

-can see that strategies child uses changes with age

 Nothing in these examples suggests a linear progression of stages
 Across many domains, the overlapping waves metaphor is much more appropriate than the stages metaphor
 The processes that lead to development of strategies occur throughout the lifespan
 Cognitive development involves many different components:
 Changes in frequency of existing strategies
 New ways of thinking
 Improvements in speed, accuracy, and automaticity
 Ability to cope with wider range of problems

Question 11

Executive Function

Answer 11

 Imagine an orchestra…
 String section = attention control (how fast can people switch attention, attention important in inhibition)
 Brass section = planning (organising behaviour to reach certain goal)
 Woodwind section = working memory (maintaining and processing relavent information)

 These sections are able to work independently, but they affect each other to certain degrees
 e.g. your memory will affect how well you can plan
 The equivalent of executive functioning in an orchestra would be the conductor
 This system controls and manages the other cognitive processes

Question 12

Development of executive fuction

Answer 12

• Diamond 2013

- synaptic density in prefrontal cortex increases during childhood

Question 13

What is the role of executive function in development?

Answer 13

Carlson & Moses, 2001,
 EF limitations may prevent children displaying cognitive skill

Cognitive skill –> executive function (production deficit)

 EF limitations may prevent children developing cognitive skill
Executive Function –> cognitive skill (mediation deficit)

Question 14

Working Memory

Answer 14

 Working memory can be limited in several ways:
 Capacity (number of units it can operate on at any time)
 Rate at which information is lost (15 to 30 seconds)
 Develops throughout childhood
 Provides a brake or limitation on development

Question 15

change in auditory working memory capacity

Answer 15

-Pickering and Gathercole 2001
-working memory 5-15
working memory model
-central executive, phonological loop, visual-spatial sketch
-continues to improve throughout childhood until reach adult level

Question 16

What affects working memory capacity?

Answer 16

 Change in knowledge
 Expert child chess players recalled more than novice adults (Chi)
 Change in strategies
 Development of more efficient strategies, such as active instead of passive rehearsal
 Automatisation (Guttentag, Case) (when practicing task, becomes automatic eg driving a car)
 Change in processing speed
->experiment processing takes 3 times longer for 4 y/o than adult
 Increases with age
->eg mental rotation and visual search experiments

-increased efficiency produces more storage space (if operating, reduces space for storage)

Question 17

Does faster speech rate lead to increased memory span?

Answer 17

• Hulme et al 1984
• important thing is how long take person to see word
• > if recall words that take less time to see will recall more than words that take less time to see?? (is she meaning say?)
• two aspects: time interval to store words and rate which can speak
• > faster speak more words can produce
• look at age effects
• results: increase words spoken from age 4 to adulthood
• memory span, faster speech rate as you get older seems to be important

Question 18

Working memory and cognitive performance

Answer 18

Working memory measured by backward digit recall at 5 years
 IQ measured with subtests from Wechsler PPSI at 5 years
 Wechsler literacy and numeracy abilities assessed at 11 years
 Both WM and IQ at 5 years significantly and independently predicted literacy and numeracy at 11 years (WM better indicator)

• as get older more knowledge
• > crystal (vocab) instead of fluid intelligence (object assembly)
• use standardized test
• working memory better predictor than IQ

Question 19

Working memory, speed & fluid intelligence

Answer 19

-Fry & Hale 1996
 Participants aged 7 - 19 yr
 Speed of processing
     4 separate Reaction Time tasks (same/different, visual search, match-to-sample)
 Working Memory
      2 digit tasks, 2 spatial tasks
 Fluid Intelligence
      Raven’s Progressive Matrices

 Speed, Working Memory and fluid intelligence all improved with age
 Speed had no direct effect on fluid intelligence
 Speed mediated most of the age-related changes in Working Memory
 Direct causal link between Working Memory and fluid intelligence (with age controlled)

-so by statistically controlling for age effects can find out that processing speed has a direct effect on working memory capacity and these differences in memory direct determinant of fluid intelligence

Question 20

Working memory an analogical reasoning

Answer 20

-Stevenson et al. 2013
 Children aged 7-8 yrs
 Pre-test on analogical reasoning
 Working Memory assessments
 Listening recall task: spoken sentence, asked to repeat the first work and ask to say if sentence true or false
 Spatial span: same if same or different, say where red dots dots were, measure visospatial memory
-multiple choice figural analogy: pick which one fits best

• see if working memory important for training and recall
• given analogical and working memory pretests

 Pre-test on analogical reasoning
 Participants received training on 3 different types of analogy tasks
 Geometric analogies
 Seriation
 Teaching task
 Spatial Working Memory was positively related to analogy improvement
after training
 There was no difference in type of training received
 However, there were no effects for verbal Working Memory

Question 21

How do we measure working memory in infants?

Answer 21

-Reznick et al. 2004
 It is possible to measure working memory in infants using a delayed response task
-4-7 months
-infant sees face in one of two windows
-covered by curtain and distracted
-does infant remember face?
-same criteria as t test, above red=above chance

-25% under 5.5 months passed, 80% of infants over 5.5 months passed

Question 22

Tests of attention (inhibitory) control

Answer 22

• stroop test
• wisnconsin card sort test
• dimensional change car sort test

Stroop task (Tipper et al. 1989)
 Interference from word produces slower responses to conflict stimuli
 Conflict condition: more error responses such as “bleen”
 Children achieve adult levels by 12 years
 Inappropriate for children younger than 7 (requires adequate language and reading skills)
->not as easy when doesn’t match, have to inhibit response, conflict, slower, more error

The Wisconsin card sort test (Welsh et al 1991)

• test of perseveration
• evaluates ability to show flexibility in face of changing … of view (can understand prof)
• participant told to match cards one by one
• > colour, shape or number
• participant not told rule, but told if correct or incorrect
• not told when rule changes
• errors are made by children, once get to 12 y/o get to adult level
• not suitable for younger children

Question 23

Assessing younger children

-tests of attention (inhibitory) control

Answer 23

• Gerstadt et al 1994
• the day-night test (like stroop)
• experimental condition
• > picture night, word day visa versa
• control: random black white pattern picture

 There was an increase in accuracy between 3 and 7 years
 In the experimental condition, the picture interfered with response
 Younger children could remember two rules
 Younger children had little difficulty in control task (which had no interference)

Dimensional change card sort test (Zelazo et al. 1996)

• suitable for all ages
• sort cards based on one criteria then switch to another criteria
• > “animal game” or “colour game”

-see if poor performance due to not being able to pass task or something else

3 vs 4 y/o

• sorting vs knowledge
  3: almost 100% knowledge but poor performance on sorting, so something to do with switch that they find difficult
  4: fine with both

Question 24

How can these results be explained?

Answer 24

-Kloo and Perner 2005
Attentional inertia hypothesis
 More difficult switching attention when shape and colour are combined
 Should be easier if the dimensions are separated

• performance better when colour and shape are separated
• children follow general rule, put each card on the target that has same thing on it: its having to think about two things at once (colour and shape)
• however if separated it is much easier
• children have a difficulty in seeing objects in different ways once they’ve learned about one way
• > difficult to switch over to different way
• by reducing task demand improves task performance
• > production deficit rather than mediation

Question 25

What about adults on post-switch trials?

Answer 25

-Diamond and Kirkham 2006
“The difficulty in switching sorting dimensions on the very simple DCCS task never completely disappears”
-still present with adults

Question 26

Other tests of attention switching and inhibition in young children

Answer 26

 Tapping Task - Diamond & Taylor
 Grass-Snow Task - Carlson & Moses
 Bear-Dragon (Simon Says) – Kochanska
 Gift Delay – Kochanska

Bear Dragon test (simon says)
“This bear is nice. When he talks, we will do what he tells us to do. This dragon is mean. So when he talks to us we’re not going to listen to him.”
-assessed twice at two different ages (26-41 months then at 43-46? months
-individual childs performance correlated through both assessments, means stable individual difference
-older children at inhibitory control, not doing what dragon said

Question 27

Executive function explanation for the A-not-B search

Answer 27

• correct search on A trial, error on B trial
• infant knows where the object is hidden (looks at B), knows implicitly but habitually reach towards A

Ahmed and Ruffman 1998
 Experimenter hides toy at A, infant retrieves it
 Experimenter hides toy at B
 Experimenter retrieves toy from either:
 B - correct (possible)
 A - incorrect (impossible)
 Infants looked longer at the impossible retrieval from A
 Infants recall the correct location of the toy, even though they reach back to A
 Poor inhibitory control interferes with flexible search

Diamond 1985

• demands on developing executive functions produce the A-Not-B error
• -infants make errors on reversal trials
• infants search accurately on reversal trials
• > where were rewarded (memory) overrides attention to go to new place

Question 28

Prefrontal cortex and inhibition

Answer 28

-Diamond 1988
 Dorsolateral prefrontal cortex integrates two important skills:
 Holding a representation in memory
 Inhibiting a motor response
 Infants remember the location of the object at B, but cannot inhibit reaching back to A
 Prefrontal cortex is immature at 6 months, but develops rapidly
 Delay places demands on inhibitory ability
 Example of a production deficit

Question 29

Executive function and development of a theory of mind

Answer 29

 A Theory of Mind (TOM) involves an abstract, coherent, causal- explanatory system for explaining other people’s behaviour
 TOM involves reference to unobserved mental states, beliefs and desires
 TOM develops gradually during the preschool years
 As we have already seen, young children have difficulty understanding mental states (difficulty understanding others beliefs)
 False beliefs
 Deception
 Appearance-reality

Question 30

Understand false beliefs

Answer 30

• Sally Ann task
• > basket and marble, puts in basket and covers with cloth, also has box
• > while sally outside, ann puts marble in box
• > where does sally look for marble?
• Autistic children fail task, say look in box
• 3 y/o also fail

Question 31

Representational change

Answer 31

• crayon boc, with candles
• snoopy sleeping if comes after, ask what will think in box, correct answer crayons
• 3 y/o say candles

Gopnik and Astington 1988
-child thinks there are smarties in the tube
-but discovers pencil
4 y/o: say they thought there were smarties
3 y/o: say they thought there was a pencil

Question 32

Deception

Answer 32

-Carlson et al 1998
Child hides a toy in box A, and is told “Let’s play a funny
trick on Hollie so she can’t find the toy this time. Maybe
we could trick Hollie so she looks in the wrong box!”

• Holly asks “where is the toy”?
• 4 y/o: more likely to trick
• 3 y/o: more likely to say where is

Question 33

Box or basket

-3 years old

Answer 33

-Clements and Perner 1994
 Young children looked at the correct place (basket)
 However, they named the incorrect place (box)
 Performance was much better for implicit false belief than for explicit
-implicit TOM 3 y/o look at correct place
-explicit TOM say wrong

Question 34

Executive function and TOM

What is the role of executive function in TOM development?

Answer 34

-executive function and TOM connected
(look slide 76)

Carlson and Moses 2001
 Executive Function ability may prevent children displaying their ToM knowledge
 Production deficit
 Predict that ToM develops either before or at same time as Executive Function
 Executive Function ability may prevent children thinking about alternative mental states
 Mediation deficit
 Predict that Executive Function develops before ToM

-executive function (inhibition) developms before theory of mind
 ToM tasks
 Unexpected transfer
 Deceptive box
 Executive Function
 Luria lights task (go, no-go)
 Luria hand game (trained to do 2 diff hand gestures show opposite of experimenter)
 Tested longitudinally 6 times between 3yr and 3yr 5m (microgenetic study) (show sequence of development, know which came 1st)
Flynn et al, 2004,

 Executive Function (inhibition) develops before change in performance on ToM tasks
 Suggests that improvement in Executive Function causes changes in ToM
Executive Function ——» Theory of Mind