Balliergeon explanaition of infant abilities Flashcards
(19 cards)
What is the main difference between Piaget’s and Baillargeon’s views on object permanence?
Piaget argued that object permanence develops gradually during the sensorimotor stage ( 8–12 months), measured by observable behaviors like searching,Baillargeon showed that infants as young as 3.5–5 months exhibit an understanding of object permanence, longer looking times in violation of expectation tasks.
What is the Violation of Expectation (VOE) paradigm and how is it used in infant cognition research?
presents infants with both expected and unexpected events, measuring their looking times. Longer looking times at unexpected events suggests infants are surprised when events violate their innate expectations about physical laws.
How did Baillargeon et al. (1985) design their study on infant object permanence?
Infants were shown a series of events where an object behaved either consistently with or in violation of physical laws. The study used looking time as the dependent variable to assess whether infants noticed when an event contradicted expected physical behavior.
What were the key findings regarding looking times in Baillargeon’s VOE study?
infants looked longer at unexpected events (an average of 33 seconds) compared to expected events (around 25 seconds), indicating that infants detected a violation of their expectations about object continuity.
What is the Infant Physical Reasoning System (PRS) as proposed by Baillargeon?
an innate or early-developing system that equips infants with core knowledge about the physical world, including basic rules such as object permanence and how objects should behave.
What strengths does the VOE method offer over traditional methods like those used by Piaget?
minimizes the impact of motor development by relying solely on observation of looking times rather than active searching, making it a more sensitive and accurate measure of infant cognitive abilities.
What are some limitations of the VOE method in assessing infant cognition?
- the possibility that longer looking times may reflect factors like perceptual novelty or stimulus salience rather than a true cognitive understanding of physical principles.
How do Baillargeon’s findings contribute to the debate on nature versus nurture in cognitive development?
supports the idea some cognitive abilities—such as the understanding of object permanence and basic physical laws—are innate or pre-wired, rather than solely acquired through sensorimotor experience.
How have replication studies and variations in the VOE paradigm reinforced Baillargeon’s conclusions?
Subsequent studies using similar paradigms (e.g., occlusion, containment, support tasks) have consistently found that infants look longer at impossible events, reinforcing the notion of early physical reasoning.
What alternative explanations might account for the observed differences in looking times in VOE studies?
that infants might simply be attracted to novelty, perceptual differences, or individual curiosity, rather than demonstrating a genuine understanding of the underlying physical principles.
What are the implications of Baillargeon’s research for our understanding of early infant cognitive abilities?
challenge traditional stage theories by suggesting that infants possess a rudimentary, innate understanding of the physical world much earlier than previously thought.
In what ways do Baillargeon’s methods overcome the methodological issues present in Piaget’s studies?
By removing the need for active motor responses, the VOE method avoids confounds related to underdeveloped motor skills, offering a more direct measure of infants’ expectations about physical events.
How were looking times measured in Baillargeon’s studies, and what was the role of eye-tracking technology?
video recordings and stopwatches, with inter-rater reliability checks, because modern eye-tracking technology was not available at the time.
What evidence supports the idea that the Physical Reasoning System (PRS) is universal among infants?
Consistent findings across various VOE studies and cross-cultural research suggest that infants, regardless of background, display similar expectations about physical events, supporting the universality of the PRS.
What criticisms exist regarding the assumption that looking time is a direct indicator of cognitive understanding?
longer looking times may merely reflect attention to novel or perceptually salient stimuli, rather than a genuine cognitive grasp of physical principles.
How might Baillargeon’s research inform educational practices or theories of cognitive development?
Her work implies that cognitive abilities are present earlier than traditionally believed, suggesting that educational strategies could build on these innate capacities and adjust developmental timelines accordingly.
What does Baillargeon’s work imply about the nature of cognitive development during infancy?
cognitive development may begin earlier and be more sophisticated than previously thought, with infants possessing inherent core knowledge that guides their interpretation of physical events.
What methodological considerations should be taken into account when interpreting the results of VOE studies?
Researchers should consider factors such as perceptual novelty, stimulus salience, and the limitations of drawing cognitive inferences solely from observational measures like looking time
Why is the difference in looking times between expected and unexpected events significant in understanding infant cognition?
The difference suggests that infants have established expectations about how the physical world should operate; deviations from these expectations elicit a surprise response, which serves as evidence for early cognitive processing.
