Methods Flashcards
(16 cards)
object permanence
the understanding that whether an object can be sensed has no effect on whether it continues to exist
Piaget’s work on object permanence
In Piaget’s work, they found that baby’s garnered object permanence at around 9 month old
however, the task they used required babies to physically reach for the object in front of them
- babies physical capabilities are generally beginning at this 9 month mark, but object permanence might be occurring at a lesser age without their motor ability having developed yet
The principles of a violation of expectations task - novelty preference to detect for object permanence
Infants are shown an event that should evoke “surprise” or “interest” if it violates something that they know or assume to be true
- in the test, infants will look at something longer than they should if it violates what they know than if it were just a novel task
- therefore, looking time becomes an index of whether the babies have experienced something that violates their expectations of the world
Violation of expectations tasks look for two different events
It violates expectations if:
- the baby has detected something novel
- whether the baby deems what happened as impossible
if they look at the impossible event more than the possible event we infer that it violates expectations
- a violation of expectations reaction would suggest that the babies understand object permanence
The Drawbridge Studies - Object Permanence and its Method
Babies watched a screen flip back and forth
a) habituation condition - occurred over and over until no longer interesting
b) dishabituation - novel event
c) possible event (counterbalanced with impossible) - a block is placed to stop the full rotation of the screen
- the block cannot be seen by the baby, for it is hidden behind the screen
d) impossible event - appears to move through the block
included a control without the block addition, but the screen would stop at the same point as it would if the block were there
if the babies were interested in the block, then they would report different results to the controls
The Drawbridge Studies - Object Permanence and its Results
- looking time decreases for the habituation trial
- looking time does not change for the dishabituation task
- looking time for impossible even significantly higher than the possible even
3 and 1/2 month old with faster learning ability showed object permanence similar to 4 and a 1/2 month olds
Occlusion (violation of expectation tasks having shown strong understanding of objects among young people)
- rat goes behind one of two walls then appears behind the other
- babies realised it wasn’t possible
Containment (violation of expectation tasks having shown strong understanding of objects among young people)
babies shown fabric put in cylinder or behind cylinder, cylinder was moved to the side and babies are to find where the fabric had gone
possible: fabric behind
impossible: fabric gone
- they come to the conclusion that it is impossible to put something through a contained space and come out the other side
Covering (violation of expectation tasks having shown strong understanding of objects among young people)
babies would have looked less if object hadn’t been moved impossibly
Violation of expectations studies have shown that young infants understand number (addition) (Wynn 1992)
Addition Measure
- object placed
- screen placed
- second object placed
- hand leaves empty
possible event: screen drops and there is 2 objects
impossible event: screen drops and there is 1 object
result: babies looked longer at inaccurate addition condition than accurate one
Violation of expectations studies have shown that young infants understand number (subtraction) (Wynn 1992)
- two objects placed
- screen comes up
- empty hand enters
- one object removed
possible: one object remains
impossible: two objects remain
result: babies looked longer at inaccurate subtraction condition than accurate one
General results around Wynns’ 1992 study on violation of expectations tasks showing an understanding of number
babies looked at impossible condition more than possible
- they can understand basic arithmetic knowledge at 3-4 months old
- opposing Piaget’s theory that they learn this during the concrete operational period
Violation of expectations studies show babies understand goal-directed action (Woodward 1998)
- Habituation - hand consistently reaches for ball instead of toy
- Test Phase - ball is in position of toy
- possible: hand reaches for ball
- impossible: hand reaches for toy
new goal in same position VS old goal in different position
controlled for whether it was human-oriented: used inanimate object reaching or ball or toy instead of hand
The results of the violation of expectations studies show babies understand goal-directed action (Woodward 1998)
Found a significant difference in looking time when there is a goal change rather than a new path
- difference was only seen when the agent has a hand as opposed to a rod
babies understood objects despite the location they were placed in –> when put somewhere new they looked less than if a hand picked a new object
- babies can be sensitive to goal-directed action in human as opposed to inanimate objects
When Children are better Learners than Adults - the causal reasoning task at UC Berkeley
Blicket Detector - “some objects are blickets, use the detector to find which they are”
- there are more non-blickets than blickets
- comparing disjunctive (independent probability of bringing out an effect, i.e. one object can cause an effect) and conjunctive (multiple signals evoke an effect)
After training trials they are placed in test events with either idea about disjunctive or conjunctive conditions
hypothesis: expect that in disjunctive, they believe one object causes a response
- in conjunctive, believe multiple objects cause a response
Results to the test of when children are better Learners than Adults - the causal reasoning task at UC Berkeley
adults are more likely to say an effect is disjunctive even when presented with conjunctive conditions prior
- certain that one object is a blicket
- children perform better in conjunctive task significantly
- adults had similar responses in conjunctive and disjunctive conditions, however children understood conjunctive causes greater than adults
- adults weakly influenced by conjunctive training
