baillargeon's explanation of infant abilities Flashcards

You may prefer our related Brainscape-certified flashcards:
1
Q

what was Baillargeons criticism of Piaget

A

He underestimated the cognitive abilities of children, she suggested that children had a better understanding of the physical world than suggested. eg. the lack of understanding of object permenance could be explained differently - babies lack the necessary motor skills to pursue a missing object or are easily distracted.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
2
Q

How did baillargeon believe we could test young babies cognitive abilities

A

Developed the violation of expectation method. In a typical experiment there are two test events, the expected event and the unexpected event.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
3
Q

what was baillargeons procedure

A

24 babies aged 5-6 months showed a tall and short rabbit passing behind a screen. Expected event the short rabbit passes behind a screen w/ a window, because of the height the short rabbit dissapeares until it appears on other side. In unexpected event the tall rabbit would not be seen through the window as it moves from one side to the other. A baby with object permenance should show suprise at the unexpected event.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
4
Q

what did Baillargeon find from her experiment

A

Babies looked for an average of 33 seconds at the unexpected event compared to 25 seconds at the expected.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
5
Q

How can Baillargeons findings be explained.

A

when the baby does not see the tall bunny ears this violates their expectation, as they should see them through the window as there is nothing to occlude the view of the tall bunny ears. As their expectation has been violated they stare for longer to make sense of what they are seeing, this is inferred that they have object permenance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
6
Q

what did baillargeon suggest was innate

A

humans are born with a physical reasoning system - a basic understanding of the physical world + ability to learn. - attend to events that might llow them to develop their understanding.
We have primitive awareness of the physical properties of the world which becomes more sophistaced as we learn.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
7
Q

what is object permenance

A

child’s ability to know that objects continue to exist even though they can no longer be seen or heard.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
8
Q

how did baillargeon test containment

A

place pen in a box with lid.
expected event - pen is still inside box
unexpected event - pen is missing.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
9
Q

how did baillargeon test support

A

placed apple on table, table is removed
expected - apple falls to ground
unexpected - apple remains hovering above ground.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
10
Q

what is a strength of Baillargeon’s methodology which allowed her to validate her theory

A

Method was highly standardised and used specialised mechanical equipment to test object permenance. She took a standardised measure of time which allowed her to measure and test many babies. As a result her findings were consistent, validating her theory and allowing sound judgements to be concluded.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly
11
Q

what is an issue with Baillargeon’s methodology

A

Problematic to use visual gaze to objectively measure an infants cognitive understanding of physical reasoning. Baillargeon inferred that the baby is staring to try and understand the violation of the expected event therefore have object permenance. This inference is subjective, the infant may be looking away because they do understand the situation therefore are not interested, or because they were distracted. Difficult to 100% validate that longer eye contact means the child has object permenance.

How well did you know this?
1
Not at all
2
3
4
5
Perfectly