Week 7- Piaget more stage 1 Flashcards
Critiques of sensorimotor stage, talk about underestimation:
- Piaget may be underestimating the children’s abilities
- His methodology is difficult, he wants infants to behave intentionally to show that they know stuff, he wants them to show motor control to show that they know stuff
- If he asked a simpler question, they might have had skills that he didn’t notice
Critiques of sensorimotor stage, talk about imitation:
- Weren’t able to represent the act b/c they don’t have mental representation (can’t imitate)
- People arguing that Piaget’s task was too hard (could make it simpler)
Critiques on stage 1 - Imitation. Meltzoff & Moore exposed babies that were 12-20 days old to a male model making faces. What happened here in terms of imitation?
- face: tongue protrusion, mouth opening, lip purse
- see if baby imitates the guy … sometimes
- 40% of babies made a tongue protrusion when model does tongue protrusion
- 10% of babies did mouth opening when model does tongue protrusion
- 2% of babies do tongue protrusion when adult is doing mouth opening
- 8% of babies do mouth opening when adult does mouth opening
We can’t find any reliable imitation in babies until they’re about __ months of age. (substage ___)
9, 4
When does deferred imitation come into play? What substage?
18 months +
(substage 6)
Critiques on stage 1 - Deferred imitation. Collie & Hayne put babies in a room and a model did cool things like turn on lights and some models did not do this, What were the results in terms of deferred imitation?
-Babies who had seen the model touch the button the previous day were more likely to push the button than babies who did not see the model push the button
Critiques on stage 1 - Memory. What do people argue about habituation/dishabituation research?
- Some people will argue that newborns who do this task use some sort of rudimentary form of memory
- Some evidence of the ability to form memories
Critiques on stage 1 - Memory. Rovee-Collier put a mobile over a 3 month-old baby’s crib for them to look at. What was the control group and experimental group? What were the results? What did the results suggest about 3 month olds in terms of memory?
- Control group: they lied there
- Experimental group: string on ankle, if they kicked -> mobile moved
- They learned quickly that kicking makes mobile move -> within a few minutes they doubled or tripled kicking rate
- sends babies away, brings them back a day or two later after training
- Places them in crib, (no string) watches to see how often they kick
- Control babies kick the same in both situations
- Experimental babies kicked significantly more in test situation where there was no string attached
- Its suggested that 3 month olds can form simple rudimentary memories
Critiques on stage 1 - Object Permanence. Explain the A not B task.
- Response inhibition (A not B)
- put object behind door A, cover it, ask where it is, they point at A, repeat a few times
- put object behind door B, ask where it is, they see you changed it but still say A
- They’re looking where the object really is but reaching somewhere else
Critiques on stage 1 - Object Permanence. Explain the point about Motor search-> intentionality.
- In substage 4, babies demonstrate object permanence by picking up a blanket that’s covering a toy (rudimentary evidence)
- We have a confound between the result (object permanence) and the criteria (ability to engage in motor search) -> some people think Piaget screwed up there
Critiques on stage 1 - Object Permanence. Talk about Baillargeon’s impossible events.
- habituation/dishabituation paradigm
- Then hit them with an impossible event
- Car goes down track behind block, they show that a box is on track but then person moves it when it is hidden and baby thinks its impossible so they stare longer at the box on track
- When there is an impossible event -> baby is surprised and stares longer
Critiques on stage 1 - Object Permanence. Baillargeon’s impossible events- Evidence of Object Permanence at 4.5 months, explain fan experiment.
- control group: habituation to fan without box
- experimental group: habituation to fan with box
- test impossible event (fan going through box), if they look longer at box, is it OP? only if they don’t generally look longer at longer events
Critiques on stage 1 - Object Permanence. Baillargeon’s impossible events- Evidence of Object Permanence at 3.5 months, explain short carrot and tall carrot passing behind screen experiment.
- Short carrot or tall carrot passing behind screen
- Babies habituate to carrots going through
- Possible and impossible event
- Screen changes so that there’s a hole cut into it (window), short carrot is shorter than window so you see that come out the other side
- With the tall carrot, you should see it in the window but you don’t -> impossible event
- Babies look longer at impossible event but become less interested pretty quickly b/c they figure there must be two carrots
Overall evaluation of stage 1?
- more or less accurate picture of infants’ abilities
- only real critique is underestimation: methodological limitations
