Lecture 5: Mechanisms of Cognitive Change Flashcards
Information Processing
Receive information ->
internal processes transform/store information ->
act on information
CHARACTERISTICS OF INFORMATION PROCESSING THEORIES OF COGNITIVE DEVELOPMENT
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
How does development occur?
A linear progression of stages (Piaget)?
Gradual development (Flavell)?
How are new strategies incorporated? Do they always replace old strategies?
Three strategies for fitting shapes
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
Siegler’s theory
- several alternative strategies
- choose strategy with most success rather than causes failure
- each experience provides feedback
- strategy selection can be variable and inconsistent
Overlapping waves model of cognitive development
- 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
Primary school addition strategies
- 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
Alternative strategies in arithmetic
-primary school addition strategies
-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)
Monitoring of component process
-kitten delivery
-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
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
- 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
Executive Function
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
Development of executive fuction
- Diamond 2013
- synaptic density in prefrontal cortex increases during childhood
What is the role of executive function in development?
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)
Working Memory
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
change in auditory working memory capacity
-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
What affects working memory capacity?
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)
Does faster speech rate lead to increased memory span?
- 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
Working memory and cognitive performance
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
Working memory, speed & fluid intelligence
-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
Working memory an analogical reasoning
-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
How do we measure working memory in infants?
-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
Tests of attention (inhibitory) control
- 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
Assessing younger children
-tests of attention (inhibitory) control
- 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
How can these results be explained?
-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
What about adults on post-switch trials?
-Diamond and Kirkham 2006
“The difficulty in switching sorting dimensions on the very simple DCCS task never completely disappears”
-still present with adults
Other tests of attention switching and inhibition in young children
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
Executive function explanation for the A-not-B search
- 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
Prefrontal cortex and inhibition
-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
Executive function and development of a theory of mind
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
Understand false beliefs
- 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
Representational change
- 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
Deception
-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
Box or basket
-3 years old
-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
Executive function and TOM
What is the role of executive function in TOM development?
-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
