CLPS 0610 Questions 31-39

Define the following terms: independent variable, dependent variable, between-subjects design, and within-subjects design

An independent variable is the factor that is manipulated or varied in an experiment to observe its effect on the dependent variable. The dependent variable is the outcome or behavior that is measured and affected by the independent variable. In a between-subjects design, different participants are exposed to different conditions, meaning each group experiences only one level of the independent variable. In a within-subjects design, the same participants are exposed to all conditions, and each participant experiences every level of the independent variable.

Describe an experiment that suggests there is a development in infants’ category judgments between birth and 6-months-old.  Make sure to include a discussion of what might be developing.

An experiment by Quinn et al. (2001) suggests that infants’ category judgments develop between birth and 6 months old. In their study, newborns were habituated to images of either cats or dogs and then shown a novel member from the same category and a novel member from a different category. Newborns looked longer at the novel object from the different category, indicating they could distinguish between the categories. By 6 months old, however, infants showed more specific categorization abilities, as they could not only differentiate between cats and dogs but also generalize category membership based on more abstract, conceptual features, such as shape or size, rather than solely relying on perceptual features like fur patterns. This suggests that infants’ categorization abilities evolve from being based on perceptual features at birth to incorporating more conceptual and abstract features by 6 months, reflecting a developmental change in how infants categorize objects.

Throughout the semester I have suggested that data can be interpreted differently by different theories. Provide an example. Pick any experiment we have discussed in class or in the reading during the semester and explain how two different theories of cognitive development would explain those data. Use empirical evidence to support your answer.

Baillargeon's (1987) drawbridge task, where infants look longer at an impossible event (a drawbridge passing through an object), can be interpreted through the nativist perspective, which suggests that infants are born with innate cognitive structures that allow them to understand basic physical principles, such as object permanence. From this viewpoint, the infants' longer looking at the impossible event indicates that they have an inborn understanding of how objects should behave in space and expect objects to be solid and not pass through one another. The surprising nature of the event suggests that infants are born with a core knowledge of physical properties, which is revealed even at a very early age without needing prior experience.

What does it mean for an infant to have a concept of occlusion? What does it mean for an infant to have a concept of containment? Do these concepts emerge at the same time? Support your answer with empirical data.

For an infant to have a concept of occlusion means they can understand that objects can be hidden or blocked from view by other objects but still exist behind the occluding object. For example, in Baillargeon's (1987) experiment with a drawbridge, infants looked longer when the drawbridge passed through an object, violating their expectations of solid objects, suggesting an early understanding of object permanence and occlusion. A concept of containment, on the other hand, involves recognizing that an object can fit inside a container, as demonstrated by Spelke et al.'s (1992) experiment where infants understood that a ball could fit inside a box. These concepts do not necessarily emerge at the same time. Research indicates that infants may have a basic understanding of occlusion earlier (around 4 months), while the understanding of containment might develop later (around 7-8 months). This difference in timing suggests that infants' understanding of object properties develops progressively, with occlusion concepts emerging before containment.

Baillargeon’s (1987) paper talked about the difference between fast and slow habituators, and showed that these two groups of infants performed differently on the drawbridge task. Describe this study in detail and then why Baillargeon thought fast habituators respond differently from slow habituators. Do you agree with her interpretation? Why or why not?

Baillargeon (1987) used the drawbridge task to study object permanence in infants by showing them a drawbridge either stopping at a block or passing through it, violating expectations. Fast habituators, who lost interest quickly, looked longer at the impossible event, indicating they understood object permanence better than slow habituators. Baillargeon suggested that fast habituators are more sensitive to novelty and can detect violations of expectations more effectively. While this interpretation seems reasonable, it’s possible other factors, such as attention or temperament, might also contribute to the differences in performance.

What is the difference between a dyadic and triadic representation?  At what age does each develop?  Describe a behavior consistent with infants possessing each representational capacity.

A dyadic representation involves two entities, typically the infant and an object, while a triadic representation involves the infant, an object, and another person, recognizing the relationship between all three. Dyadic representations develop earlier, around 6 months, as infants can engage with objects in simple cause-and-effect interactions. Triadic representations emerge around 9-12 months, as infants start to engage in joint attention and social referencing, understanding the perspectives of others. A behavior consistent with dyadic representation is an infant reaching for an object, while an example of triadic representation is an infant looking back at a caregiver for guidance when encountering a novel object.

What is a longitudinal study? Provide an example. Compare and contrast longitudinal studies to both correlational and cross-sectional studies.

A longitudinal study is a research design that involves observing and collecting data from the same participants over an extended period of time to track changes and developments. An example is a study that follows children from infancy to adolescence, assessing their cognitive development at regular intervals. Compared to correlational studies, which examine relationships between variables at a single point in time, longitudinal studies can establish cause-and-effect relationships by observing changes over time. In contrast to cross-sectional studies, which compare different age groups at one point in time, longitudinal studies provide a clearer picture of how individuals develop over time, controlling for the effects of age.

Is morality innate? How might researchers demonstrate this? (Note, this question will only be in play if we get to this material. I will announce whether it is relevant.).

The question of whether morality is innate is a topic of debate in developmental psychology. Nativist theories suggest that moral behaviors, such as empathy or fairness, are hardwired into humans from birth, while others argue that morality is learned through socialization and experiences. Researchers might demonstrate the innateness of morality by conducting experiments that observe moral behaviors in infants or even preverbal children. For example, studies like those by Hamlin et al. (2007) suggest that infants as young as six months old can distinguish between helpful and unhelpful behaviors, indicating that some moral judgments may be innate. Researchers may also explore cross-cultural studies to see if moral concepts appear universally across societies, which could further support the idea of innate moral foundations.

Knowledge of the physical world begins with knowing what an object is. In class, I described three problems infants must solve in their reasoning about objects. What are they? Be sure to define each problem. Provide empirical evidence that infants solve at least two of these problems at different point during development (be sure to mention when they solve each). 

The three problems infants must solve in their reasoning about objects are segregation, representation, and identification (individualization). Segregation refers to the ability to distinguish one object from another or from the background. Representation involves understanding that objects continue to exist even when they cannot be seen, like object permanence. Individualization is the ability to recognize and distinguish different objects as distinct entities. Empirical evidence shows that infants solve these problems at different stages. For example, Baillargeon's (1987) drawbridge experiment suggests that infants develop an understanding of object permanence (representation) as early as 4 months. Similarly, Kellman and Spelke's (1983) experiment demonstrates that infants can segregate objects based on motion at around 2 months, highlighting early problem-solving in segregation.