Cognition and development Flashcards
(40 cards)
what is a schema?
Mental building block of knowledge about the world, learnt through experiences.
behavioural - e.g. how to use an object
cog - e.g. classifying objects/people
basic schemas are innate - e.g. grasping flex or face recognition.
describe the four stages of Piaget’s Theory of cognitive development: schemas
Assimilation - fitting new info into an existing schema.
disequilibrium - state of confusion/imbalance when new information cannot fit into existing schema (can’t be assimilated).
accommodation - adapting an existing schema or creating a new one to incorporate new info that doesn’t fit into existing schema.
equilibrium - when person has restored balance (state of calm) through accommodating info that previously didn’t fit a schema.
lifespan learning - These processes take place throughout our life, however young children can’t accommodate and harder as we become elders.
outline evaluation for Piaget’s theory of cog dev: schemas
Strength-evidence that schemas exist and are innate
Ev - Research has found infants prefer faces compared to other objects as young as 4 days old.
Ex - So schemas must be innate as they have had little life experience in which to develop this schema. Face preference has been replicated in several studies, so can be assumed that Piaget’s theory is valid and schemas are a construct that exists both biological and env.
L - but could be argued these studies aren’t showing schemas but an infants preference for symmetry as other objects would not be symmetrical like faces. So schemas may not be innate and only learnt through lifelong learning solely.
RS for equilibrium
Ev - Psychologists found children’s learning was helped when there was a mild cognitive conflict between what they expected to happen and what happened
Ex - so equilibrium is a concept that does exist and that equilibrium does have an impact on accommodating info into schemas to restore the balance.
L - But this makes assumptions about the conflict being experienced. Coukd be argued equilibrium is more about a feeling of cog dissonance rather than expectations or people’s beh. So Piaget’s theory an be invalid - not possible to measure and prove it in scientific way through empirical measurements. But this begs Q of whether it’s necessary to be able to physically measure a mental process to say it’s a valid concept.
criticised for ignoring role of language in cog dev which Vygotsky argued was fundamental
Ev - Language shapes our thinking processes, e.g. Carmichael et al gave pps 1 of 2 labels for certain drawings, e.g. shown a kidney shape and told it was either a kidney bean or a canoe. When pps were then asked to draw the shape, it differed according to the label they’d been given.
Ex -Piaget underestimated the power of language in shaping out thought processes.
L - But piaget would argue cog dev comes from and shapes language - only when could children conserve after the age of 7 did they use more complex language (‘larger’ rather than ‘bigger’) Supports Piaget’s view that cog maturity is important for language and not the reverse as suggested by Vygotsky.
name the four stages and ages of Paiget’s theory of intellectual development
- Sensorimotor (0-2yrs)
- preoperational (2-7yrs)
- concrete operational (7-11)
- formal operational (12+)
describe the sensorimotor stage
(0-2yrs)
Children learn through ‘trial and error’ and understand the world through their basic senses (mouths)
key development - **object **permanence (believing an object ceases to exist when it cannot be seen)
Begin to develop object permanence at around 8 months of ages - understand objects out of sight still exist
names and describe the key studies for sensorimotor stage?
Hidden object study
method - Piaget hid a toy under a blanket when the child was watching. Observed whether the child continued to search for the hidden toy. If searched = object permanence.
Results - infants younger than 8m immediately switched attention away from object.
begun searching for hidden toy at around the age of 8m.
A not B study
method - Paiget hid a toy under cover A with 9-month old infants. After repeated successful attempts at retrieving the toy, hid it under cover B.
results - Infants still searched under cover A even though they watched the toy be hidden under B. So 9m old infants don’t fully understand object permanence. By 2 years they can do A not B tasks successfully.
what were the issues and counter studies of the object permanence study?
could be due to limited working memory. Another study found that children were more successful at the A not B when took less than 1 second to move toy.
blanket could have acted as a distractor - another study - 12 infants at 1-4m old- observed whether they continued to reach for an object on a mobile above their cot after the lights went out and they did.
shows Piagets method was flawed due to having another object hiding the first one, distracting the infant from the previous object.
Outline evaluation for Stage 1 (sensorimotor) of intellectual development and object permanence
strength-controlled exp have shown the age at which object permanence develops
-Ev - Piaget hid toy under blanket whilst the child was watching. He observed whether the child searched for the hidden toy. if the child searched for it- evident had object permanence. (8m)
In a second experiment, Piaget moved a toy from blanket A to B. Found before 2 years of age, infants continued to search for the toy under blanket A (original hiding place) rather than correct location B, despite them seeing it be moved there.
-Ex - suggests object permanence begins to develop at around the age of 8 months and a full understanding of object permanence is made by 2 years. Supports Piagets theory of intellectual development; that object permanence develops by age through biological maturation (as brain develops)
but making inferences as to what failure to search for an object means. May not necessarily mean they don’t have OP
-Ev - could be due to limited working memory. Another study found that children were more successful at the A not B when took less than 1 second to move toy.
-Ex - Therefore, the results could be more due to a limited working memory than ability to have object permanence.
Another criticism of Piagets methodology is that the blanket can act as another distractor
-Ev - 12 infants at 1-4m old- observed whether they continued to reach for an object on a mobile above their cot after the lights went out and they did.
-Ex -This shows Piagets method was flawed due to having another object hiding the first one, distracting the infant from the previous object.
underestimated infants as they have OP at a younger age than he supposed.
L- criticised as infant had up to 3 mins to complete task, Reaching up could just be cuz of lights going out and random motor movement from infant not OP.
L - However Baillargeon would support idea that OP can happen earlier than Piaget supposed as bio innate. Calls into Q Piaget’s constructivist theory - believed bio maturation of OP schema but that it was env constructed through ‘trial and error’
name the 3 key developments in preoperational stage.
conservation
egocentrism
class inclusion
descibe conservation and the study on it for the preoperational stage of development.
conservation: ability to realise quantity remains the same even when appearance of object changes.
Beakers volume study:
method - Two beakers with same amount of liquid in each. Asked children between 2-7 years and above 7 years whether the liquid in them was the same or different . Both children said same. Liquid then pored from one beaker into a thinner beaker (knew no liquid had been added/taken away).
Results - 2-7 = more liquid as appearance of liquid was higher up the beaker.
7+ = same.
what was the issue and counter study of the conservation beaker study.
criticised due to repeated questioning within the studies - Could lead to children changing their answers to please the researcher (social desirability) of which children are highly susceptible to doing.
Samuel + Bryant repeated - told the children beakers had same amount of liquid. poured into second beaker - asked Q is the liquid amount the same or diff?. Found children older than 5 years made less errors.
outline evaluation for stage 2 (preoperational) and conservation.
Strength: scientific evidence to support the fact that children under 7 cannot conserve
-Ev - Piaget had 2 beakers with same amount of liquid in each. asked child between age of 2-7 and above 7 years if liquid in them was same or different. Both said same.
When liquid was poured from one beaker into a thinner one the children aged 2-7 said more liquid as the appearance of the liquid was higher up.
Older than 7 - said same.
-Ex - Implies children cannot conserve properly until 7 and base knowledge of volume and quantity on appearance which is inaccurate. So intellectual development improves with age (biological maturation) in fixed aged stages as Piaget said.
criticised due to repeated questioning within the studies
-Ev - Could lead to children changing their answers to please the researcher (social desirability) of which children are highly susceptible to doing.
Samuel + Bryant repeated - told the children beakers had same amount of liquid. poured into second beaker - asked Q is the liquid amount the same or diff?. Found children older than 5 years made less errors.
-Ex - Piaget underestimated the age children can correctly conserve based on a knowledge of liquid remaining the same volume rather than appearance, as children can do this aged 5 rather than 7 as long as not questioned more than once.
But doesn’t mean ability to conserve isn’t biologically driven by age
-Ev - children questioned once still needed to be aged 5 years to conserve without basing it on appearance.
-Ex - Paiget’s theory that we construct knowledge as we age in fixed age ranges is still valid.
-L - However, according to Vygotsky, the reason for the age-related differences is due to env differences in the role of experts such as their parents and educators. But Paiget would be in agreement as he was constructivist and acknowledged an interaction of bio maturation and env trial and error play.
describe egocentrism and the study for it.
Egocentrism - lack of ability to see from a diff perspective to their own. children tend to see the world from their own POV.
3 Moutntains Task:
method - doll placed on opp side of mountain to child. asked to look around mountains and describe what they could see. Then asked what the doll could see.
results - 2-7yrs = gave own perspective rather than dolls.
7yrs+ = described what dolls could see accurately - diff to own perspective.
what was the issue and counter study of the egocentrism 3 mountains study?
unrealistic and abstract to children aged 2-7
Hughes gave the children a model with 2 intersecting walls, and 3 dolls (a boy and 2 police officers). Asked to place the boy doll where the police couldn’t see him.
Children as young as 3.5yrs were able to position the boy where one police officer could not see him 90% of time.
4yrs could do this 90% of the time when there was 2 police officers to hide from.
outline evaluation on egocentrism in stage 2 of intellectual dev
Strength-scientific evidence to support the fact that children below the age of 7 = egocentric
-Ev - Piaget created a 3 mountains task where a doll was placed on the opposite side of the mountains to the child.
The child was asked to look around and describe what they could see. Then what the doll could see. 2-7 gave their own perspective rather than the dolls. whereas children older than 7 years described what the dolls could see accurately -diff to own perspective.
-Ex - children below 7 are unable to consider that other people have info or views that are different to the ones they hold. But with bio maturation children dev ability to consider views diff to theirs.
But the methodology - unrealistic and abstract to children aged 2-7
-Ev - Hughes gave the children a model with 2 intersecting walls, and 3 dolls (a boy and 2 police officers). Asked to place the boy doll where the policd couldn’t see him. Children as young as 3.5yrs were able to position the boy where one police officer could not see him 90% of time.
4yrs could do this 90% of the time when there was 2 police officers to hide from.
-Ex - So Piaget’s theory underestimates younger children’s ability to perspective take. 3 mountains was more abstract so Piaget may have been measuring abstract thinking rather than perspective taking.
Paiget emphasises importance of bio maturation and supposed intellectual dev was a serial process
Ev - Children with learning disabilities like ASD can develop concrete operational skills, conservation and class inclusion but not egocentrism.
Ex - suggests stages of intellectual dev don’t occur in sequence but develop skills sep. Supported by modern studies which have shown that with the right support, children are capable of being less egocentric at an early age.
Therefore, egocentrism may not be biological innate, based on age but through using scaffolding and the role of experts, such as parents can increase the dev of perspective taking (as Vygotsky assumed)
However, there seems to be a biological component to egocentrism
Ev - Baron-Cohen studies on mirror neurons with those with ASD found a bio deficit in activity of mirror neurons.
Ex - hence perspective taking could develop through bio maturation with age as mirror neurons develop.
L - but could lead to argument of if the support from others and language (Vyg) could develop mirror neuronal connections quicker in children than if not encouraged to perspective take.
describe what is meant by class inclusion and the supporting study.
Class inclusion - advanced classification skill where we recognise there are subsets in classes of objects. Children in pre-operational stage struggle to classify objects into more than one catergory
Cats and dogs study:
method - Paiget showed infants models of 5 dogs and 2 cats. Asked them - ‘are there more dogs or animals?’
results - 2-7 = more dogs
7+ = animals. - understood dovs and cats are a subset of classification ‘animals’
why was cats and dogs study criticised, give the criticising study.
didn’t consider role of experts teaching children an understanding of class inclusion
A study tested 100 5 yr olds from Slovenia. Each child undertook 3 sessions of 10 class inclusion tasks either in condition 1/2.
Condition 1 - received feedback after each session. e.g. more animals than dogs as 9 animals and 6 dogs.
Condition 2 - received feedback that there must be more animals as dogs were a subset if animals (true expl).
Scores across 3 sessions improved more for condition 2 suggesting they had aquired a real understanding.
outline evaluation for class inclusion
Strength: scientific evidence to support the fact that children below 7 years cannot class include
-Ev - Paiget showed infants models of 5 dogs and 2 cats. Asked them - ‘are there more dogs or animals?’
2-7 = more dogs
7+ = animals.
-Ex - so children older than 7 understood that dogs and cats are a subset of the classification ‘animals’. Children below 7 could only understand one classification which is dog or cat but not the larger category of animal.
criticised as didn’t consider role of experts teaching children an understanding of class inclusion as Vygotsky theorised
-Ev - A study tested 100 5 yr olds from Slovenia. Each child undertook 3 sessions of 10 class inclusion tasks either in condition 1/2.
Condition 1 - received feedback after each session. e.g. more animals than dogs as 9 animals and 6 dogs.
Condition 2 - received feedback that there must be more animals as dogs were a subset if animals (true expl).
Scores across 3 sessions improved more for condition 2 suggesting they had aquired a real understanding.
-Ex - Suggests that teaching children about class inclusion increases ability to develop skills before age of 7. So Piaget underestimated age at which children could class include.
Criticsm- Piaget overemphasises role of bio maturation
Ev - Piaget beleived class inclusion dev was based on age and that all children could class include by 7. However, Vygotsky suggested that development can be explained more in terms of social rather than individual age factors.
Ex - childrens dev is based on peers, teachers, parents and right scaffolding to help them dev rather than it being based on age. By teaching them the skills, e.g. mathematical knowledge of conservation and bio knowledge of class inclusion, children can class include far earlier than Piaget supposed.
L - But Piaget didnt dispute the role of env in constructing dev of skills. Though he did undervalue the role of others and placed more emphasis on child learning for themselves through ‘trial and error’ play. This may have been a researcher bias as both Piaget and his children were more introverted than Vygotsky’s.
describe the key study in the concrete operational stage
feather and hammer study -
method - children below and above age of 11 were told 2 rules -
rule 1- if you hit a glass with a hammer, the glass will break.
rule 2 - if you hit a glass with a feather the glass will break. Asked what would happen to the glass.
results -
below 11yrs: they said the glass will break for rule 1 and the glass won’t break for rule 2.
above 11yrs: glass will break for both.
children in concrete operational stage are distracted by content they know to be true. They are unable to imagine or apply an abstract idea/rule.
describe the formal operational stage of intellectual dev
children can:
- formally reason, and not become distracted by concrete content.
- solve abstract problems and understand abstract ideas.
- can see multiple potential solutions to problems and think more scientifically about world around them.
- can self-reflect, imagine ideal situations that don’t exist and reality check their own beliefs (meta-cognition)
outline evaluation for Piaget’s theory of intellectual development
Scientific evidence used to test children, however methodology flawed
Ev - Same beakers and liquid, asking same standardised question of whether beakers had same or diff in amount of liquid and change in appearance that causes the cog error to occur as all other variables were kept the same.
However, we cannot draw this conclusion as the use of repeat questioning made the children believe their first response was incorrect and changed their answer due to social desirability as child re are more susceptible to pleasing others.
This was supported by Samuel and Bryant who removed the first question. told same, asked if same or diff. Children over 5=more accurate in conservation saying liquid same. Therefore Piaget underestimated age conserve.
Also lacked realism that children could relate to - 3 mountains. When made more realistic with the police and boy doll, children as young as 3.5yrs were able to position the boy where one police officer could not see him 90% of time.
So underestimated age of egocentrism (could argue still unrealistic for children - police)
however doesn’t mean ability to conserve isn’t bio innate - children questioned once still needed to be 5, 3.5 years still egocentric. So we do construct knowledge as we age in fixed age ranges.
but, he still downplayed the role of the env
Ev - underestimates children’s intellectual ability. Many studies on pre-operational thinking have shown children develop the skill earlier than supposed.
Ex - Supports idea that env is important in dev of intellectual skills not just biological maturation. Such as the role of experts in teaching children how to conserve, class include etc. (e.g. Class inclusion counter study - 100 5yr olds slovenia. When given a real explanation(cond 2) from an expert of class inclusion, s across 3 sessions improved more for condition 2)
L - but Piaget would argue he never intended the ages of his stages to be fixed. He appreciated it was a range and that some children develop cognition sooner than his maximum age.
However, Piaget had provided important RLA to education
Ev- prior to his theory, education was taught formally to both children and adults. Piaget recognised children think differently to adults and learn more through self-discovery. Activities should be planned for the child’s dev age.
Ex - This brought about the change in gov policy on education, e.g. the Plowden report (1967). Changed the curriculum within primary education in the UK to include the use of ‘trial and error’ and play in early years.
L - criticised of emphasis on play and self-discovery. Ignores role of the expert in passing on knowledge, and need for scaffolding to enable children to reach their academic potential (Vyg). Could be researcher bias - introverts
We accept Piaget’s conclusions within education alongside the role of experts - Vyg.
So incorporating both env factors and age= important in developing cognition.
describe the role of experts and language in Vygotsky’s theory of cognitive development
- basic elementary functions are innate (e.g. reflexes)
- more complex higher mental functions (e.g. language comprehension and problem solving) is environment/nurture.
- The role of experts (e.g. parents, teachers) is important in developing the higher mental functions such as mathematical knowledge.
- Language is an important factor. child develops from pre-intellectual speech to using semiotics (signs and symbols), which are culturally specific. This occurs through a shared dialogue with experts, e.g. parents.
what is the zone of proximal development (ZPD)
Region where cognitive development takes place.
Where there is enough challenge that the child is not within their current understanding but not too much challenge where they are out of reach.
describe how ZPD can be achieved
through scaffolding.
successful scaffolding is based on cognitive regulations.
Demonstration - modelling to the child how to do it
Recruitment - getting the child interested in the task.
preparation - gathering the appropriate resources
reduction in degrees of freedom - focusing child back on task - indicating what the next step may be.
direction maintenance - motivating them to persist and giving specific instructions, then moving to general prompts. (e.g. praising them to show their progress)
