May- Cog Dev Flashcards
Piaget
Children actively conduct their own cognition, drives the stages of development. Constructivist theory- can be supported and guided but mostly themselves. Says origin of respasin and science- pinnacle of human development but w: assumes cultures where science less important are underdeveloped
Vygostsky
Share some cog w animals- some innate. Children construct via social interaction and scaffolding. Social constructivist they, influence of culture. Some overlap with piaget
Piaget main theory of cognitive development
Before Piaget thought cog adaption- changing knowledge structures in response to environemnt to improve response via interactions. Piaget said adaptation via assimilation and accommodation. Make sense of world wout needing to process everything as new. Now they are related, called concepts and categorisation. Categorisation is processing now w support from out knowledge structures
Piaget stages
Sensorimotor- 0-2 (learning about entities and properties using touch, dev object permanence. Preop 2-7: think symbolically make believe but egocentric and contraction, lack of logic, lack of conservation. Conc op 7-11: more rational and move away from contraction and egocentrism, still concrete and struggle abstract. Formal op 11+: can think abstractly
Perspective taking
Sensorimotor little to none as don’t look for covered up toy. Preop: start but struggle e.g. 3 mountains task, also appearance reality task where out mask on the cat, until 6 struggle and say dog. Has been replicated w sponge to look like rock- stop making errors at 4-5. In recent research, 29% of 3 year olds pass but if reframe using appearance reality trick task, then. 79% pass . Disputes Piaget
Concepts and categorisation
In philosophy, concept is a constituent of thought, in cog psychology an idea that allows us to organise objects on basis of similarity. Nativists say ppl born w some concepts, empiricist say concepts only from expereince but born w ability to construct concepts from experience
Categorisation
If infants think 2 things are similar, they must have a concept e.g. bath and duck- bath time . Can be hierarchical w concepts nested together. Subordinate is further differentiations, basic is easiest to perceive, superordinate is harder as one thing doesn’t tell you about the category. Prototypical it is that some more typical than other. Abstraction is category is the core idea for many entities, doesn’t rep one real thing e.g. general idea of an animal
Distinguishing between basic categories
Visual paired comparison experiment- infant on mother’s lap and experimenter sees where it looks. Familiarisation pages w 2 id stim until bored, test is one new one old. Quinn 93: 3m had multiple cats then ne cat and diff animal, if notice a diff, will split 50/50 but if. On pet knowledge look at bird longer. Looked at bird 64% longer. Behl 96: superordinate categories as degraded images w multiple pictures of animals, when 2 new, looked equally new- looked at non mamal. Quinn 87: abstract categories: examples of squares or triangles made of dots, has shapes that aren’t perfect, when shown new diamond, looked longer .
Other perceptual cues
Babies use basic like shape, colour have higher level like spatial, auditory, touch h and texture- robust abilities to from categories peven w degraded stim so core ability, don’t know if only use perceptual info
Core knowledge- nativism or empiricism
Baby has reflexes, giving them perceptual experience so build simple knowledge- empiricist, and grow concepts . Evidence is object permanence not there 0-8m but 8-12 m search for moved objects in og location not true. At 12-18m, don’t track objects that change when out of sight. Full object permanence at 18-24m. But infants shown to represent hidden at younger age- baillargeon 87:see book open and closed, then box to stop it. If I permanence, don’t think box there so should find possible event more novel. Find longer looking for impossible- suggest brown some?
Core object knowledge
System of object rep- expectation of how objects move eg. Cohesion as awhile, continuity and contact- influence each other. Cohesion- Johnson and aslin 95: habituated w lines moving behind block- if cohenesion think same object, if not- see as 2. Found look more at impossible
Core number knowledge
Magnitude, ratio and addition but not as strong. Izard: play a phone a certain number of times e.g. 16/4. In test shown 4 or 16 objects and found 2 day old who heard 16 looked longer at 16, 4 longer at 4- no novelty preference but suggests familiarity
Core mind knowledge
The sally Anne task. Meta analysis of 178 studies found per of acne after 4-5 improves-not core knowledge . Onishi 2005: 15m familiarised w adult p,acing object in right side, then the object moved to left. Infants look longer where it actually is so expect false belief- Haiti isn’t?. Hard to tell if innate as still some expereince
