Baillargeon's explanation of early infant abilities

Question 1

Violation of Expectation (VOE)

Answer 1

Carrot Study:
- infant show surprise watching impossible event
- large and small carrot travelling along track, passing by window
**Expectation > large carrot seen behind window. However carrot can’t be seen so it violates the expectation
FINDINGS:
¬ age 3mths shown object permanence
¬ shown by infant looking longer at larger carrot
*Therefore, Piaget underestimated permanence abilities in infants

Question 2

Schlesinger & Casey

Answer 2

• Challenged internal validity of VOE
• task might have been more interesting, therefore infants looked longer
• may not be that infant actually understood the expected outcome
  ¬ How do you know what an infant is thinking?

Question 3

Physical Reasoning System (PRS)

Answer 3

• infants born with systems that allows them to make sense of physical world
  ¬ children born with everything they need to know to interpret world, whereas Piaget state this is learnt through surroundings (discovery learning)
  **i.e. infants 9.5mnths shown covered ‘bulge’, suggesting something is underneath, they show surprise when revealed nothing is there

Question 4

False Belief

Answer 4

• innate understanding of infant’s psychological world
  ¬ having understanding that others may think differently and hold info that’s inaccurate
  STUDY: SKUNK AND DOLL
  *toys placed in box away from actors view but within infants view
  *skunk placed in box with blue hair coming out, doll placed in plain box
• infants show surprise when actor opens plain box looking for doll
  ¬ they expect actor to hold false belief
  ISSUES:

Question 5

Spelke

Answer 5

• believes infants born with innate ability to understand physical world
• lack of evidence to support baillargeon’s claim that infants demonstrate mental expectations
  ¬ Piaget may have been more accurate that innate abilities are primitive and mature with age/ experience

Question 6

Comparisons

Answer 6

DIFFER: P state that by 8mnths infants understand this principle
¬ not just demonstrates understanding like baillargeon
DIFFER: B state this is innate whereas P state child learns from environment (discovery learning)
BOTH: criticised for internal validity.
¬ P (motor coordination)
¬ B (what is infant thinking)
**NN debate is the ‘relative contribution of each side to our development’, therefore both theories contribute to our understanding of children’s development of permanence

Question 7

Evaluation

Answer 7

• research is controlled and less biased sample
  i.e. child sat on parents’ lap for comfort but parents had eyes closed so couldn’t communicate surprise to child
• lacks internal validity in VOE
• culture bias