naughty teddy study

Question 1

sample?

Answer 1

80 children from scotland

Question 2

aim?

Answer 2

to find out if the childs reaction would be different if there was no deliberate change in the row of counters

Question 3

method?

Answer 3

• 2 rows of counters, one with 4 white counters, one with 4 red counters
• the teddy transformed them by making one row appear longer than the other
• asked the children ‘are there more counters here or here, or are they the same?’ before and after the transformation

Question 4

what % of children gave the correct answer when there was an accidental change (moved by the teddy)

Answer 4

68%

Question 5

what % of children gave the correct answer when there was a deliberate change (moved by the experimenter)

Answer 5

41%

Question 6

explain the difference between the primary and nursery aged children

Answer 6

both figures were higher for primary aged children

Question 7

conclusion?

Answer 7

the way children think changes when they get older. however, the traditional method of testing conservation underestimated what children can do

Question 8

weakness 1? (school)

Answer 8

one weakness is that the primary school children all came from the same school. this might be an extraneous variable as the primary school children may have done better on the conservation tasks as the parents were more educated and gave the children more help. whereas children from other schools with parents less educate might not have had the same support. this reduces the validity of the conclusions.

Question 9

strength? (piaget)

Answer 9

a strength of the study is that it challenges piagets assumptions. piagets work may have confused the children. theyre actually more able than piaget thought, but his way of questioning them was confusing. this is an important part of the scientific process, as original research is challenged and refined.

Question 10

weakness 2? (distractions)

Answer 10

another weakness of the study is that the childrens better performance in the accidental part may have been because they didnt notice any change. they may have been distracted by the teddy and not noticed any change. this was further supported by other research (moore & frye) who found that if the teddy took away a counter, they still said the same. this means that the distraction of the teddy meant they werent looking. it didnt mean that they were conserving.

Question 11

independant variable?

Answer 11

counter arrangement

Question 12

dependant variable?

Answer 12

childrens conservation