CLPS 0610 Quesetions 11-20

Quiz prep :(

Object segmentation and occlusion has often been studied from a Nativist perspective. Provide an example of this. Then explain how an alternate theory of cognitive development could explain these same data, but also inspired a new experiment. Full credit on this question will only be given if you present at least two experiments.

Spelke et al. (1992) provide a nativist perspective on object segmentation, showing that 4-month-old infants use static perceptual cues (such as spatial relationships) to recognize object boundaries. In their experiment, infants looked longer when a ball appeared to pass through a solid platform, suggesting an early understanding of object solidity. However, a constructivist perspective, as seen in Hespos & Baillargeon (2001), suggests that infants gradually learn object properties through experience. They found that 4.5-month-olds detected violations in occlusion events but did not understand containment violations until 7.5 months, indicating a developmental progression. A constructivist-inspired experiment could track how infants’ understanding of occlusion evolves over time by presenting them with increasingly complex barriers and objects across multiple ages, examining the role of experience in learning object permanence and segmentation.

Describe an experiment that shows that infants can segment objects through static perceptual information. Define the static perceptual information infants are using in the experiment you present.

Spelke et al.'s (1992) experiment demonstrates that infants can segment objects through static perceptual information. In this study, 4-month-old infants were shown a ball dropping behind a screen, with two test conditions: a consistent display (where the ball remained above the platform) and an inconsistent display (where the ball seemed to pass through the platform). Infants looked longer at the inconsistent display, suggesting they used static spatial cues, such as the relationship between the ball and platform, to understand object boundaries and the principle of solidity. This indicates that infants can segment objects and understand their continuity based on spatial and perceptual information, even without motion.

Define domain. What does it mean for a theory of cognitive development to be domain-specific? What does it mean for a theory of cognitive development to be domain-general?

A domain refers to a specific area of knowledge or skill, such as language, number, or object perception. A theory of cognitive development is domain-specific if it posits that different cognitive abilities are governed by distinct, specialized systems or modules, each evolving independently. In contrast, a domain-general theory suggests that cognitive development relies on a single, flexible system capable of applying to multiple areas of knowledge, with general mechanisms supporting learning across various domains.

In class, we discussed distinct Piagetian substages of the Sensory-Motor stage regarding object permanence. What are they?  Describe (in terms of task performance) what is occurring during each substage that is relevant to object permanence.

1. Piaget's Sensory-Motor stage includes six substages, each showing different levels of object permanence. In the first two substages (0-4 months), infants primarily respond to stimuli and lack object permanence, failing to search for hidden objects. By 4-8 months, in the third substage, they retrieve partially hidden objects but not fully hidden ones. In the fourth substage (8-12 months), infants make the A-not-B error, searching where an object was last found rather than where it was last placed. In the fifth substage (12-18 months), they overcome this error but still struggle with invisible displacements. By the final substage (18-24 months), infants develop full object permanence, using mental representations to infer an object's location even when hidden

Piaget thought that the transition from the sensory-motor to the preopertation stage was indicated by children having an adult-like concept of object permanence and their ability to engage in pretend play. Why do you think Piaget thought this?

These milestones reflect the development of mental representations. Object permanence shows that children understand that objects continue to exist even when they are not visible, signaling an emerging ability to think beyond immediate sensory experiences. Pretend play, on the other hand, indicates the development of symbolic thought, where children can use objects or actions to represent something else, demonstrating their growing capacity for mental abstraction and more complex cognitive functions.

Describe any experiment on infants’ (younger than 18 months) cognition that shows a link between the infants’ own behavior and their performance on a violation of expectation or other looking-time measure. What do these data mean for a theory of cognitive development?

One experiment demonstrating the link between infants' own behavior and their performance on a violation-of-expectation task is the study by Sommerville, Woodward, and Needham (2005) on goal attribution. At around 3 months old, infants were given experience with Velcro-covered mittens that allowed them to grasp objects before they could do so independently. After this active experience, these infants looked longer at a violation-of-expectation event where a hand reached for a new object rather than a familiar one, suggesting they understood goal-directed action. Infants without this experience showed no such sensitivity. These findings support the idea that self-produced action plays a role in shaping infants' understanding of others' actions, aligning with constructivist theories of cognitive development, such as Piagetian and embodied cognition approaches, which emphasize learning through interaction with the environment.

Define proto-imperative and proto-declarative pointing. What is the difference between them?

Proto-imperative pointing and proto-declarative pointing are both early forms of communication in infants. Proto-imperative pointing occurs when infants point to request something or get another person to do something, such as pointing to an object they want. Proto-declarative pointing, on the other hand, is when infants point to share attention or show interest in something, like pointing at an object to draw someone else’s attention to it. The key difference is that proto-imperative pointing is goal-directed, aimed at obtaining a desired outcome, while proto-declarative pointing is social and intended to engage others in a shared experience or observation.

Describe how nativist theories, information processing theories and the theory theory each differ from Piaget’s theory of cognitive development.

Nativist theories, information processing theories, and theory-theory each differ from Piaget's theory in their views on cognitive development. Nativist theories argue that cognitive abilities are innate, with infants born equipped with core knowledge or specialized modules for specific domains (like language or number), while Piaget believed that cognitive development arises through interaction with the environment and is constructed over time. Information processing theories, on the other hand, focus on the gradual improvement of cognitive processes, such as memory, attention, and problem-solving, and emphasize continuous development rather than stage-based changes, contrasting with Piaget's stage theory. Lastly, the theory-theory perspective posits that children actively construct theories about the world, similar to scientists testing hypotheses, and their cognitive development involves refining these theories as they acquire new information, which differs from Piaget's more structured stages of development based on cognitive structures.

What does it mean for infants to recognize correlations among features of objects? Describe an experiment suggesting that this ability develops during the first year of life. How does this development relate to infants’ categorization abilities – specifically, whether infants’ categorization is based on perceptual or conceptual features of objects?

For infants to recognize correlations among features of objects means they can perceive that certain characteristics of an object (like shape, color, or texture) tend to occur together consistently. This ability helps infants make sense of the world by grouping objects based on these correlations. An experiment by Quinn et al. (2001) suggests this ability develops during the first year of life. In the study, 4- to 6-month-old infants were shown pictures of animals and non-animal objects and were habituated to a particular category. When presented with a new object from the same category, infants showed less interest, indicating they recognized the category. However, when presented with an object from a different category, infants looked longer, suggesting they recognized a correlation between the features of objects in the same category. This development is closely tied to infants' categorization abilities, as it shows they can categorize based on perceptual features (like color and shape), which forms the basis of early categorization before conceptual features (like function or category membership) become prominent later in development.

Describe Kellman and Spelke’s experiment on object occlusion. What does this experiment tell us about infants’ basic perceptual abilities? Link this conclusion to another experiment discussed in class or in the reading.

Kellman and Spelke (1983) conducted an experiment on object occlusion to investigate how infants perceive partially hidden objects. In the experiment, infants were shown a rod moving behind a screen, either appearing as a continuous, unified object or as two separate pieces. The infants looked longer when the rod appeared split into two parts, indicating that they expected the rod to remain continuous behind the screen. This suggests that even young infants have an understanding of object permanence and perceive objects as whole, continuous entities, even when they are partially obscured.

This experiment supports the idea that infants have basic perceptual abilities to track and represent objects in space, which is also demonstrated in Spelke et al.'s (1992) violation-of-expectation study, where infants expected objects to obey the principle of solidity. Both studies point to early-developed cognitive mechanisms for understanding object permanence and the continuity of objects.