Piaget's research Flashcards
1
Q
What was the Blanket and Ball study used to research?
A
- Object permanence.
2
Q
What was the aim of the Blanket and Ball study?
A
- To determine the age that children develop object permanence.
3
Q
What was the procedure of the Blanket and Ball study?
A
- The child watched Piaget hide a toy under a blanket.
- Piaget observed whether or not the child searched for the hidden toy.
4
Q
What are the findings of the Blanket and Ball study?
A
- Infants under 8 months old did not reach for the hidden toy.
- Infants 8 months + searched for the hidden toy.
5
Q
Conclusions of the Blanket and Ball study…
A
- Searching for the toy was evidence of object permanence because an infant can only search for something if they have a mental representation of it.
- These findings suggest that a child is not born with object permanence, but it is acquired during the sensorimotor stage (at around 8 months).
6
Q
Criticism of Blanket and Ball study (A03)
A
- Criticised for underestimating the cognitive abilities of infants.
- Evidence of object permanence relied on motor skills (to reach out) + this limited Piaget’s ability to record this skill.
7
Q
Conflicting research- Blanket and Ball study (A03)
A
- Later research by Baillargeon used the Violation of Expectation technique and measured a child’s gaze.
- Found that evidence of object permanence could be seen in babies as young as 3 months old.
8
Q
What was the Swiss mountain study used to research?
A
- Egocentrism.
9
Q
What is the aim of the Swiss mountain study?
A
- To see at what age children are able to see the mountain scene model from their viewpoint.
10
Q
What is the procedure of the Swiss mountain study?
A
- Children aged 4-8 were presented with 3 paper mache mountains, each with something different on top; a red cross, snow or chalet.
- Children walked around and explored the model, then sat on one side while a doll was placed on one of the other sides.
- They were shown pictures and asked which one shows the dolls view.
11
Q
What are the findings of the Swiss mountain study?
A
- 4 year olds chose the picture matching their own view= they were still egocentric.
- 6 year olds showed an understanding of other viewpoints, but often selected the wrong picture.
- 7 + 8 year olds consistently chose the picture representing the doll’s view= they were able to decentre.
12
Q
Criticism of Swiss mountain study (A03)- artificial
A
- 3 mountain method uses an artificial set up that is not representative of real-life perspective taking experiences.
- Although Piaget tried to give the task high mundane realism by choosing Swiss mountains that were familiar to his sample of Swiss children, the set up itself remains contrived.
13
Q
Criticism of the Swiss mountain study (A03)- demand characteristics
A
- Also the children knew they were part of a study and that their responses were being recorded.
- This means that they may have thought differently about the questions they were being asked.
- This is a demand characteristic + may be more effective to use a covert experiment/ observation.
14
Q
Criticism of the Swiss mountain study (A03)- complex
A
- This method has been criticised for being too complicated and that children may not have understood the question.
- This means that Piaget may have underestimated the abilities of the children and they may be able to decentre sooner than he thought.
15
Q
Conflicting evidence of the Swiss mountain study (Hughes)
A
- Hughes developed a less complicated method of testing egocentrism using a 3D model of intersecting walls.
- He found that 90% of children aged between 3.5-5 years could hide a doll where a police doll could not see it, suggesting that young children are not egocentric and supporting the idea that Piaget underestimated their abilities.
16
Q
Conflicting evidence of the Swiss mountain study (Gelman)
A
- Found that 4 year olds use simpler forms of speech when talking to 2 year olds.
- This would not be expected if they were egocentric.
17
Q
What do Hughes and Gelman’s studies tell us?
A
- These studies support Piaget’s idea that the shift from egocentrism to taking other’s perspectives is age related.
- BUT they challenge the age at which this happens- finding that this skill is acquired earlier than Piaget suggested.
18
Q
What skill do conservation tasks research?
A
- Conservation.
19
Q
What is the aim of conservation tasks?
A
- To determine at what age a child can recognise that the appearance of an object can change without affecting its volume, length or number.
20
Q
What is the method of conservation tasks?
A
- Piaget presented children with 2 identical objects or set of objects.
- They are first shown that the objects are the same (in a key property such as number, size or volume).
- Then one object is changed so that it appears different from the other (longer, wider or taller) but the key property actually remains the same.
- Children are then asked if the two objects are the same or different.
21
Q
What are the findings of conservation tasks?
A
- Children in the preoperational stage (2-7) typically judged the objects to be different after the transformation, even though the key property had not changed, suggesting they could not conserve.
- Children in the concrete operational stage (7+) could recognise that the object remained the same, and so could conserve.
22
Q
Conclusions of the conservation tasks…
A
- Piaget stated that the incorrect responses were an indication that these children had not yet mastered the ability to conserve.
- They focused on the change rather than on the fact that the key property remained the same.
- The findings suggest that conservation skills are acquired at the beginning of the concrete operational stage.
23
Q
Criticism of conservation tasks (A03)- demand characteristics
A
- Argued that it is not a valid measure of reasoning skills.
- Psychologists have suggested that poor performance on this task is most likely due to task demands, e.g. the child makes the assumption that the experimenter expects them to give a different answer when the question is asked a second time.
- This demand characteristic acts as a confounding variable and reduces the internal validity of the task.
24
Q
What was McGarringle & Donaldson research used to research?
A
- Conservation skills that overcame the issue Piaget faced.
25
Q
What is the aim of McGarringle & Donaldson’s study?
A
- To see if children are capable of conservation when the counters were moved accidently instead of deliberately.
26
Q
What is the method of McGarringle & Donaldson’s study?
A
- 80 Scottish children (aged 4-5) were shown two rows of 8 red and white counters.
- They were asked “Are there more here? Here? Or are they both the same number?”
- In one condition a teddy deliberately moved the counters in one row. The researcher asked the questions again.
- In another condition a ‘naughty teddy’ jumped out of his box and accidently messed the counters in one row. The researcher pointed to each row and asked again “Are there more here? Here? Or are they both the same number?”
27
Q
What are the findings of McGarringle & Donaldson’s study?
A
- About 40% gave the correct answer after the teddy messed with the rows deliberately.
- About 68% gave the correct answer after the teddy messed with the rows accidentally.
- More children aged 5 gave the correct answer than children aged 4.
28
Q
Conclusion of McGarringle & Donaldson’s study?
A
- In this study many of the children could conserve quantity during the preoperational stage (at 4-5) younger than Piaget suggested.
- BUT there were still age differences, so the study supports Piaget’s idea that children progress at different rates within the stages of their cognitive development.
29
Q
Strengths of McGarringle & Donaldson’s study…
A
- More robust than Piaget’s- it had greater controls and so had higher internal validity.
- The accidental actions of the teddy aimed to reduce the demand characteristics seen in Piaget’s conservation tasks, this means that it is more likely that McG&D were genuinely testing conservation skills.
- Their findings support the assumption that Piaget underestimated the children’s abilities.
30
Q
Class inclusion tasks (overview)
A
- Piaget’s class inclusion test used white and brown wooden beads.
- He found that children are in the preoperational stage were unable to give the right answer to the question, “Are there more brown beads or more wooden beads?”.
31
Q
McGarrigle class inclusion tasks (procedure)
A
- McGarrigle used a slightly different version of this test.
- He used four model cows, three of them black, and one white.
- He laid all the cows on their sides, as if they were sleeping. Six year old children were then asked:
1. Are there more black cows or more cows?
2. Are there more black cows or sleeping cows?
32
Q
McGarrigle class inclusion tasks (findings)
A
- 25% of the children answered question 1 correctly.
- 48% of the children answered question 2 correctly.
33
Q
McCarrigle class inclusion conclusion..
A
- This suggests that children are capable of understanding class inclusion during the preoperational stage (at 6) earlier than Piaget believed. This probably because the task was made easier to understand.
- McGarrigle concluded that it was the way Piaget worded his question that prevented the younger children from showing that the understood the relationship between class and sub-class.
