piaget Flashcards
describe the main ideas for piagets theory of cog dev
applied darwins evolution
bio knowledge run everyday lives and ensures survival
mind interacts with environ
constructivist - interaction between nature and nurture
domain general - can be applied to all domains, subset of environ to be learnt about
grand stage theory - everything that occurs is subject to being at a specific stage
define a schema
pocket of information
structured organisation of experiences
framework to build upon
becomes increasingly flexible as knowledge enhances
define accomodation
alter schema to fit new info
schema does not entirely fit environ
define assimilation
apply schema to new environ to work out how to deal with
define organisation
the rearrangement of schemas, interconnecting to form and internal cog system
what are the stages of development
sensorimotor 0-24m
preoperational 2-7yrs
concrete op 7-11yrs
formal op 11+
define the sensorimotor stage
infants think via senses
cant carry out mental activity and behabiour is governed by interaction with the external world
grow and refine knowledge until have capacity to think
describe the different stages in the sensorimotor period
reflexive schemes 0-1m - only able to use reflexes which are first centred around own body and then become external
primary circular reactions 1-4m - chance motor activity produces a response that infant tries to repeat and strengthen new schema
secondary circular reactions 4-8m - gain voluntary control via PCR motivated by basic needs. skilled at reaching for and manipulating objects and imitating others
coord secondary circular reactions 8-12m - combine schemas into action sequences, behaviour is goal oriented and intentional .a not b error
tertiary circulatory reactions 12-18m - explore objects in novel ways, imitate novel behaviours and repeat with variation. advanced object permanence mean no more a not b error
mental rep 18-24m - sudden solutions show internal depictions, make belive play and deferred imitation
describe a not b error
incomplete understanding of object permanence
action and object bound to specific location - reaching makes reappear
dont understand that object has been moved
describe Kellman and Spelke (1983) challenges to piaget
habituation and dishabituation in 4m olds
greater dishabituation to when object behind block is not one
describe hood and willat (1986) challenges to piaget
5m old reach in dark for object seen previously
suggest have object permanence
describe billargeon et al (1985) challenges to piaget
5m old habituated to screen that moves back and forth in 180 arc
box placed behind screen
cond 1- possible event - screen stops when reaches box
cond 2 - impossible event - screen continues through space occupied by box
look longer at impossible event suggesting understood box continues to exist when occlueded and screen should stop
describe billargeon (1986) challenged to piaget
infant abilities to represent the existance and location of hidden stationary objects and ability to represent trajectory of hidden moving object
possible event - box placed behind screen away from track
impossible - box on track - should stop car
look longer at impossible and surprised that reappears
criticisms of billargeon
results cannot be fully replicated
effect is perceptual not conceptual
diamond 1985
describe diamond (1985) criticism of billargeon
25 infants tested every 2 weeks on a-b error
delay between hide and retrieval increase from 2 to 7 1/2m
all children display a not b error consistently
girls tolerate longer delays than boys
criticisms of piaget
underestimate idea of core knowledge - born with
too much emphasis on motor and not cognititve
describe the preop stage
thinking somewhat more abstract
think in terms of symbols but not effective
can hold mutually incompatible beliefs
knowledge not concrete
focus on one aspect at a time
knowledge must be refined by equillibriation - when knowledge doesnt fit into new situation, seek to repair by accomodation - forms stable system of invariant subsystems
preop vs concrete op
preop - not attained ability to perform reversible transformations
concrete - not subect to perceptual interference and can have reversible transformation
errors in preop
class inclusion focus on states egocentrism conservation - number, liquid, mass Pendulum prob
describe class inclusion error
“are there more light or wooden ones?”
all wooden
- report more light as cant comprehed difference/categories
describe focus on states
preop more status
dont incorporate intermediate fluid movements
concrete understand substages
describe egocentrism
3 mountain task
“what does the doll see?”
describe own view not doll as cant understand diff views
describe conservation of liquid
understanding that physical properties remain the same even though there is a change to the appearance
“does one glass have more, less or the same amound of liquid?”
report more if taller
describe conservation of number
“is there the same no. coins in each row, how do you know?”
- report spread out as more
what does the inability to conserve say about a child in the pre op stage
focus is centred - focus on one aspect of a situation and dont acknowledge critical features
lack the ability to reverse the steps
cant distinguish relevant and irrelevant feature
lack knowledge of invariance - things dont change under certain circumstances
describe the sally anne test
sally touch marble in basket sally goes outside anne takes mmarble and puts in box sally comes back "where will sally look for her marble?"
-understand diff view so would say in basket
if doesnt - will say box
what does piaget suggest causes failure to conserve?
inability to perform transitive inferences
- understandnig how objects are related to eachother
describe the seriation task
3 rods/sticks
a>b>c
is a > c?
describe animism
in preop- animate and perfonify the inanimate
“where does the sun go?”
“it goes away because it doesnt want to be rained on”
challenges to piaget preop - memory
errors may occur because knowledge not available when needed
bryant and trabasso (1971)
trained children to remember the length of the rods in the seriation task
children can make transitive inferences and correctly answer
challenges to piaget preop - misunderstanding
rose and blank (1974)
only ask once not twice as piaget would
repeat indicates first answer was wrong
liquid conservation - gave sig more correct answers
mcgarrigle and donaldson (1974)
“naughty teddy”
puppet used to mess up row of coins
children report 72% more correct than 35% without intentional naughty teddy
donaldson (1978)
“where can the robber hide to escape the policeman?”
report correct places suggesting not egocentric
problems with mcgarrigle and donaldson (1974)
children distracted by naughty teddy due to centring and therefore do not focus on transformation and report as before
moore and frye (1986)
mcgarrigle may be finding a false positive
naughty teddy take counter away as well as spread out - report same nod
describe seigler microgenetic study against piaget
microgenetic - understanding where something originates
cond 1 - feedback only
cond 2 - explain reasoning and give feedback
cond 3 - feedback and “how do you think i did that?”
explaining reasoning improved answers
- learn conservation with experience
Describe the pendulum problem
Child given strings of diff lengths, obj of diff weights
What makes a pendulum swing faster/slower
Variables
- length of string
- weight of obj
- strength of push
How do pre op deal with pendulum prob
Mix variables with no logical separation
Focus on ONE variable and ignore others (centred focus)
Can’t distinguish between relevant/irrelevant
Define operations
Logical rules ie able to understand that transition of liquid from one to another does not change physical state
Define decent ration
Ability to focus on several aspects of a situation (opposite of centred focus) - becomes prominent in concrete op
Define concrete op
7-11
More logical, flexible and organised
Can complete
Conservation, class inclusion, serial ion and spacial reasoning successfully
What does concrete op completing conservation suggest
Can perform op
Capable of decent ration
Can do reversibility
What does concrete op completing class inclusion suggest
Aware of classification hierarchies
What does concrete op completing seriation suggest
Can order items by quantitive dimension
Can mentally derogate (transitive inference)
Main prob concrete op face
Can only logically deal with concrete info perceived directly
Find hypothetical transitive inferences difficult:
If Alice > becky > Amy
Who is tallest?
Define formal op
11+
Dev capacity for abstract, systematic and scientific thought
Don’t require concrete real world info
What op are formal op able to do that children can’t
Hypothetical deductive reasoning
-pendulum prob, form hypothesis and deduce logical testable inference
Propositional thought
-Evan logical propositions w/o red to real world ie children “Sally bought 3 lemons..”
What are the consequences of formal op cog changes in behaviour/perspective
More self conscious/ self focussed
- positive and protective for self esteem, peer acceptance and social support
Idealism and criticism
- imagine ideal poss and compare against real world - see strengths and weakenesses
Decision making
- teen more irrational than adult, more influenced by immediate reward and more heuristics
- learn from success and failure and reflect on decision making process into adulthood
