cognition and development Flashcards
(19 cards)
Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development AO1
Piaget proposed that cognitive development is influenced by biological maturation and environmental interactions. He believed children think differently from adults, and development occurs through processes of assimilation, accommodation, and equilibration
Piaget’s theory is based on maturation, the idea that when children grow older the way that they think changes. Information is stored in the form of schemas, which are innate, but later develop for things and concepts
But schemas can be insufficient, and this creates an uncomfortable feeling of disequilibrium. We are then motivated to learn to try learn to try and reduce this feeling and achieve a pleasant state of balance- equilibrium.
Disequilibrium can be caused by new experiences, as they do not fit existing schema. But by assimilation, the experience can become part of an existing
There are experiences which cannot be assimilated, this is because they are very different to existing schemas. These experiences therefore undergo accommodation- which is the formation of new schemas based on these
Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development strengths
Supporting evidence
Howe et al., (1992) put children between aged 9 and 12 in groups of 4 to study and discuss movement of objects down a slope. Their understanding of the topic was assessed before and after the discussion. Following their experience of working together and discussing the topic, the children were found to have increased their level of knowledge and understanding.
This suggests that the information was used to update existing or create a new schema, supporting Piaget theory
Useful real-life application
Piaget’s theory has been successfully applied to education. Prior to his work, classrooms had children sat silently in rows, copying from the board. This has been replaced by activity-orientated classrooms in which children actively engage in tasks that allow them to construct their own understandings
Shows positive impact that it has had on education
Piaget’s Theory of Cognitive Development limitation
Cannot be generalised
Piaget saw learning as a motivated process in which children learn to equilibrate because disequilibrium is such an unpleasant experience
It may be that Piaget over-estimated just how motivated children are to learn. He studied children mainly from the nursery attached to his university and this was a biased sample of children who belonged to predominantly white, middle-class, well-educated families
This means that Piaget’s theory cannot explain cognitive development in all children
Piaget’s Stages of Intellectual Development AO1
Piaget noted that children progress through different stages of intellectual development. He saw these stages as invariant and cross-cultural
The first stage is the sensorimotor stage (0-2) and during this, children have a focus on physical sensations and develop object permanence, which is the idea that things still exist- even when they are out of view.
Pre-operational (2-7) is the second stage, and children in this stage display egocentrism- an inability to recognise viewpoints that are not their own. In addition to this, they have a lack of class inclusion, they fail to recognise that classifications can have subsets.
The third stage is the concrete operations stage (7-11) and children have mastered conservation, egocentrism and class inclusion. But can only focus on concrete objects
The final stage is the formal operations stage, in which children develop abstract reasoning and are able to process syllogism
Piaget’s Stages of Intellectual Development limitations
Cannot be generalised to all cultures
Cross-cultural evidence implies that the stages of development (except formal operations) occur as a universal, invariant sequence.
However, Dasen (1977) believes that as formal operational thinking is not found in all cultures, this stage is not biologically determined
The fact that not all individuals seem to acquire formal operational thinking, and those that do, do at different ages, suggests this stage is not uniform and varies, unlike the others
Opposing explanations
Hughes (1975) found that young children are not egocentric and do have object permanence.
90% of children aged between 3 and a half and 5 years could hide a doll in a 3D model of intersecting walls where a police doll could not see it, but they could see it
This means that children may develop the ability to decentre earlier than Piaget suggests.
The studies on which Piaget’s theory of intellectual development lack validity
Piaget’s theory of object permanence places a heavy emphasis on the role of motor development, as children must be able to reach for the toy.
Limits the validity of the theory
Reductionist
Meadows (1995) argues that Piaget neglected the important role of emotional and social factors in intellectual development and in doing so overemphasised cognitive aspects of development
He saw them as being independent as they construct their own knowledge and understanding of the physical world
This important social nature of learning is a major feature of Vygotsky’s theory.
Vygotsky’s Theory of Cognitive Development AO1
Vygotsky believed that children develop skills sequentially, but that social processes play a key role in this development, this is because knowledge begins as intermental, (between an expert and a novice) then becomes intramental
The ZPD is the gap between a child’s current ability (tasks they can do unaided) and their potential ability (tasks they can do with assistance from a more knowledgeable person, such as an adult or more experienced peer).
Scaffolding is the process of providing temporary support to help a learner complete task within their ZPD. The level of support gradually decreases as the learner becomes more capable, promoting independent problem-solving.
Vygotsky suggested that children are born with basic mental functions like perception and memory, which develop into higher mental functions (e.g., logic, mathematics) through cultural influences and interactions with others
Language plays a crucial role in cognitive development. Initially, children use language to communicate with others (pre-intellectual speech), but as they mature, they begin to use language for internal thought and problem-solving, facilitating intellectual development.
Cognitive abilities are shaped by the culture in which a child grows up. Children acquire mental tools that are relevant to their environment. For example, reading direction varies culturally (left-to-right in English vs. right-to-left in Arabic), demonstrating the role of culture in cognitive skills development.
Vygotsky’s Theory of Cognitive Development strengths
Supporting evidence
Roazzi and Bryant (1998) found that 4 to 5-year-olds performed better on a ‘number of sweets’ challenge when working with peers rather than alone as they were able to share ideas and work collaboratively on the task
This demonstrates that children can develop more advanced reasoning skills when working with more expert people
This increases the validity of Vygotsky’s theory
There is evidence that suggest that Vygotsky’s theory is superior to Piaget’s theory.
Freund (1990) got three and five-year-old children to help a puppet decide what furniture should be put in different rooms of a doll’s house. Half the children worked alone, while half worked with their mothers who provided guidance. The results showed that children given guidance performed best
This suggests that Vygotsky’s idea of scaffolding, where children work with guidance, is superior to Piaget’s idea of discovery learning, where children learn through independent exploration
Vygotsky’s Theory of Cognitive Development limitations
Cannot be generalised
Vygotsky’s theory was developed within a collectivist culture (Russia) and may be more suited to such cultures.
Collectivist cultures have a stronger element of social learning than individualistic, usually more Western, cultures.
Therefore, his theory cannot be generalised to all children across cultures. It may be that children who are surrounded by collectivist ideas, will fall into the pattern of learning with others as this is the norm of their culture. Children who are raised in individualist cultures may learn differently and may not learn best with others.
Vygotsky may not have thought about individual differences within his theory
Some children learn best during social interactions, but this may not be true for everyone.
Personality and style of information processing may have powerful effects on what sort of activities and what sort of help works for different children.
Baillargeon’s Explanation of Early Infant Abilities AO1
Baillargeon suggested that children in the sensorimotor stage have a better understanding of the physical world than Piaget proposed, this is because the methods used by Piaget caused him to underestimate children’s abilities. So, the violation of expectation (VOE) was used to compare children’s reactions to unexpected events, and their reactions to unexpected events.
Infants were shown one of two conditions- a possible condition, in which when a short rabbit and a tall rabbit passed by a window, they were able to see the tall rabbit, and an impossible condition in which they could see neither rabbit. They spent longer looking at the impossible scenario.
An innate PRS was suggested by Baillargeon, which helps us learn more about the physical world. This awareness becomes more sophisticated as we grow older, as we learn from experience.
Baillargeon’s Explanation of Early Infant Abilities strengths
Supporting evidence
Cashon and Cohen (2000) familiarised 8-month-old infants with one of four Baillargeon-type scenarios. It was found that infants looked for longer at the scenarios that were more interesting and had more novelty than those that were ‘impossible’
This suggest, that Baillargeon’s theory that infants look longer because of the knowledge that they have about the physical world may be false.
PRS supporting evidence
The PRS explains why physical understanding is universal
Hespos and van Marle (2012) suggest that without learning and regardless of experience, all humans have a very good understanding of the basic properties of physical objects.
The universality of this behaviour strongly suggests that this system is innate, otherwise psychologists would expect cultural differences to occur
Baillargeon’s Explanation of Early Infant Abilities limitations
Flawed methodology
For each of Baillargeon’s studies, the child sat on their parents’ lap. The parent could have unconsciously communicated cues about how the child should react. This would make the results of the studies invalid
. However, Baillargeon counteracted this by asking the parents to close their eyes during the study to eliminate any unconscious bias.
Therefore, it can be assumed that the results from Baillargeon’s studies were valid and controlled for extraneous variables
Contradicting evidence
There are alternative explanations of an infant’s knowledge of the physical world.
Spelke (1985) believes that infants are born with substantial knowledge regarding objects – an innate principles approach.
This contradicts Baillargeon’s idea of an innate mechanisms’ explanation, where children are born with the ability to acquire certain knowledge very rapidly.
Selman’s Levels of Perspective–Taking AO1
Perspective taking- An individual’s ability to appreciate a social situation from the perspective (point of view) of other people. This cognitive ability underlies typical social interaction.
Selman conducted research on children’s perspective-taking abilities by using a series of dilemmas which explore the child’s reasoning when faced with conflicting feelings. The dilemmas required the child to have to take someone else’s perspective.
All were individually given a task designed to measure role-taking ability. This involved asking them how each person felt in various scenarios such as the Holly dilemma. - Selman found that the level of role-taking correlated with age, suggesting a clear developmental sequence.
Selman’s stages of development:
Stage 0 (3-6 years): Socially egocentric; children cannot differentiate between their own emotions and those of others.
Stage 1 (6-8 years): Social information role-taking; children can recognize others’ perspectives but can only focus on one at a time.
Stage 2 (8-10 years): Self-reflective role-taking; children can appreciate others’ perspectives but still only one at a time.
Stage 3 (10-12 years): Mutual role-taking; children can consider both their perspective and that of another simultaneously.
Stage 4 (12+ years): Social and conventional system role-taking; adolescents can understand the need for social conventions to resolve conflicts of perspectives.
Selman’s Levels of Perspective–Taking strengths
Supporting evidence
Gurucharri and Selman (1982) performed a five-year longitudinal study using Selman’s methodology of interpersonal dilemmas. They tested the perspective-taking abilities in 41 children. It was found that 40 of these children developed perspective-taking in the way that Selman’s stages suggested
This shows that there is strong evidence that social cognitive abilities do improve with age and are not just the result of individual differences in social-cognitive ability in children in different groups.
useful applications
Research suggests children with ADHD and those on the autistic spectrum have problems with perspective taking
. Marton et al., (2009) found that those with ADHD did worse understanding the scenarios, identifying the feelings of each person involved, and evaluating the consequences of different actions
This is a strength of Selman’s work because the research has useful applications to understanding atypical development in social cognition
Selman’s Levels of Perspective–Taking limitations
Reductionist
This explanation of perspective taking could be seen as ‘overly cognitive’. Selman’s approach does not consider other factors such as the development of empathy, emotional self-regulation, family climate and opportunities to learn from peer interaction.
There is more to children’s social development than their developing cognitive abilities and this is not considered.
Research into perspective taking may be culturally biased, as research was mainly carried out on children from Western cultural backgrounds.
Wu and Keysar (2007) found that young adult Chinese participants did significantly better in perspective-taking than matched Americans.
This shows that there is more to the development of perspective-taking than just cognitive maturity because the differences must be due to different cultural inputs.
Theory of Mind AO1
This is a personal theory or belief about what people know, are feeling or are thinking
Meltzoff (1988) tested ToM in toddlers by allowing them to observe adults placing beads into a jar, in one condition, the adults struggled. In the other, the adults succeeded. After witnessing both conditions, the children successfully placed the beads into the jar. They did what the adults intended to do- not what they actuallt did
Wimmer and Pimmer (1983) told3–4-year-olds a story in which Maxi either left his chocolate in a blue cupboard, or his mother had used the chocolate to cook and then placed it in a green cupboard. 3 year olds said that Maxi would look for this chocolate in the green cupboard, but 4 year olds said the blue, showing ToM
In another study, Sally places a marble in her box and leaves. Anne enters and places the marble into her box, unbeknownst to Sally. Children were asked where Sally would look for her marble. Baron-Cohen (1985) tested children with ASD and a control of children with no diagnosis and children with Downs Syndrome. More of those in the control group identified where Sally would look for the marble
Theory of Mind limitations
Inappropriate methodology
Younger children may fail to understand false-belief tasks.
In studies such as Wimmer and Perner’s, children may have become confused with the language used to explain the task. For example, ‘Where will he look for the chocolate?’ could be interpreted as ‘Where is the chocolate?’
This means that the results shown may be due to poor methodology and therefore not a valid portrayal of when ToM develops. Children may develop ToM earlier than previously thought
There is more to having ToM than passing false-belief tasks
Children below the age of two who tend to fail false-belief tasks can initiate pretend play and understand if others are pretending.
This would suggest an ability to understand their mental state. This could suggest that ToM develops at a younger age than researchers initially suggest.
Tasks are too complex
Bloom and German (2000) suggest that success on a false-belief task requires other cognitive abilities apart from ToM, for example, memory.
Most false-belief tasks are quite long for children to remember.
These cognitive requirements may be too much for children, even if they do have ToM. Therefore, children may have a ToM, but it is not displayed with false-belief tasks as they are too complex
Mirror Neurons AO1
Mirror neurons are neurons that respond to the activity of other neurons. They have been found to help us experience the intentions of others, as suggested by Gallese and Goldman (1998)
This is because in order to interact socially, we must understand the intentions of other people. In addition to this, mirror neurons have been implicated in both perspective-taking and ToM.
Ramachandran goes as far as saying that mirror neurons may actually be behind human evolution, this is because they help us understand intention, emotion and perspective. Factors like these are the foundation for all effective social interaction
Mirror neurons may also be implicated in ASD. This is because due to a ‘broken mirror (Ramachandran and Oberman, 2006), children are not able to imitate others, preventing them from understanding behaviour. In fact, it has been found that such children do in fact typically imitate adult behaviour less than children without ASD.
Mirror Neurons strengths
Supporting evidence
Haker et al., (2012) demonstrated that Brodmann’s area 9 in the right frontal lobe, an area of the brain believed to be rich in mirror neurons, is involved in contagious yawning
This is widely seen as an example of human empathy and thus the ability to perceive mental states in others. This shows that mirror neurons play a role in empathy.
A lot of mirror neuron evidence comes from brain scans that use fMRI technology.
This means that it is an objective form of biological evidence that cannot be biased or easily open to interpretation.
Therefore, it is easier to draw conclusions of mirror neuron activity and to locate mirror neuron activity in the brain.
However, brain scans such as fMRI’s identify activity levels in regions of the brain but do not allow activity to be measured in individual brain cells
Mirror Neurons limitations
There are questions over the precise role of mirror neurons.
Hickok suggests mirror neuron activity may have more to do with using others’ behaviour to plan behaviour, rather than understanding the cognitions behind it
Researchers should provide better evidence to support their claims of the role of mirror neurons in social cognition
Social cognition seems to exist in species of animals that live in complex groupings such as primates.
This suggests a biological basis to social cognition that has evolved due to its adaptive survival value. Atkins et al., (2002) found evidence of a mirroring system in birds which implies the ability may be more widespread to different animals
Therefore, mirror neuron systems may be universal across varying species.
