baillargeon violation of expectations

Question 1

disagree with Paiget

Answer 1

-disagreed with the assumption that children lack object permeance
-other explanations include, a lack of motor skills, motivation, attention and interest

Question 2

violation of expectations (VOE) research - procedure

Answer 2

-babies see 2 events (expected and unexpected)
-unexpected violate infants’ understanding of the world (testing object permanence)
-examine if VOE has occurred by observing time babies looked for

Question 3

VOE - findings

Answer 3

-looking for an average of 8 seconds longer in unexpected compared to expected
-they were surprised so they must have object permanence

Question 4

theory of infant physical reasoning

Answer 4

born with a basic understanding of the physical world

Question 5

object persistance

Answer 5

if we cannot see something it doesn’t change the structure

Question 6

strength - good validity

Answer 6

-babies in Piaget’s research may have been distracted or lacked motor skills
-Baillargeon was more accurately assessing surprise (indication of object permanence)

Question 7

weakness - VOE may not be object permanence

Answer 7

-all VOE says that infants find unexpected events more interesting
-babies lack coordination (issues with observing infants)

Question 8

strength - universality

Answer 8

-explains universal behaviours
-e.g. when keys are dropped they fall to the ground (understanding is innate)