Cognitive Development

basic foundation of Piaget's theory

children act as little scientists and construct their knowledge of the world based on experiences

key aspects of organization

children integrate individual observations into coherent understanding

key aspects of adaptation

children progressively adapt their thinking to their environment

key aspects of assimilation

incorporation of new info into existing concepts

key aspects of equilibrium

adaptation of existing concepts into new info

4 stages of Piaget's theory

sensorimotor stage (birth-2), preoperational stage (2-7), concrete operational stage (7-12), formal operational stage (12+)

what does "lack of mental representation" mean?

children in the sensorimotor stage do not have thoughts separate from perceptions/actions in the moment

what is object permanence?

the understanding that objects continue to exist when out of view

Piaget's basic object permanence task

show infant object, infants reach for it -> hider under cloth, no longer reaches for it

A-not-B error

8-12 months, have object permanence but unstable mental rep -> hide object under cloth B and infant looks for it under cloth A

challenge to Piaget's object permanence theory

infants have obj perm before 8 mos because they reach for objects in the dark; just can't act on one object (cloth) to obtain another object (toy)

Baillargeon (1986) - Violation of Expectations

Methods: 6 1/2 and 8 mo old watch car roll down a track behind a screen - possible and impossible event with blocks

Results: both ages looked longer at impossible event

Conclusion: children younger than 8 mos expect block to stop car, therefore have obj perm

why does Esther Thelen say infants fail the A-not-B error task?

they have insufficient perceptual and motor coordination - difficult to overcome motor memory of success at cloth A

how did Esther Thelen change the A-not-B experiment to make it succeed?

weigh arms down, have them stand up (changing motor situation)

how does Piaget assess egocentrism?

three mountain task - children believe doll can only see what they see despite different angle

challenge to Piaget's egocentrism task

children are successful when a familiar context is used, like a farm

what is centration?

focusing on a striking feature of an object/event and ignoring other relevant features

what are the 3 conservation tasks and what are the typical responses?

liquid, solid, number

more liquid, more solid, more number

how can the conservation of number task be simplified?

using only 3-4 items or when a group label is used over a unit label

how did Piaget test subcategory/superordinate category preoperational understanding?

bead task

example of concrete operational children problem-solving unsystematically

pendulum swing factors - don't test one variable at a time

characteristics of formal operational stage

systematically solve problems, consider alternate hypotheses, think hypothetically, metacognition

Kim and Spelke (1992) - Gravity

sample: 5 and 7 mos

methods: ball released on slope up or down

result: 7 old look at condition 2 longer, but not 5 old

conclusion: 7 old expect ball to roll down slope

Baillargeon - Support

sample: 3 mo old

methods: box released in midair fails to fall, box touching another box fails to fall

results: look longer at 1st condition because it violates expectations, do not look longer at second condition

conclusion: support expectations develop with age

Quinn and Eimas (1996) - Categorization

sample: 3 and 4 mo olds

methods: habituated to cat pics, shown pic of different cat and then dog

results: looked longer at dog

conclusion: dishabituation to dog shows distinction b/w the 2

Oakes and Cohen (1995) - Causation

sample: 6-10 mo olds

methods: habituated to videos of moving objects colliding with stationary objects

results: looked longer when non-causal event occurred

conclusion: recognition of cause and effect

Starkey (1992) - Distinguishing of Numbers

sample: 6-9 mo olds

methods: habituated to pics of 2 or 3 objects, then saw other condition

results: looked longer at other condition

conclusion: infants can distinguish between 1 and 4

Wynn (1992) - Arithmetic

sample: 5 mo olds

methods: addition behind screen with impossible event

results: infants looked longer at impossible event

conclusion: infants understand simple addition

criticisms of Wynn's arithmetic study

results only work with 1-3 objects, and results don't replicate consistently

Zelazo et al. (1996) - Rule-Switching

sample: 3 and 4 yr olds

methods: shown card of different shapes and colors, asked to sort based on one dimension, then asked to swithc and sort based on other dimension

results: most 4 yr olds succeed, 3 yrs old continue sorting by first dimension

conclusion: 3 yr olds have difficulty inhibiting attention to previously relevant info

DeLoache (1987) - Scale-Model Task

methods: 2 1/2 and 3 yr olds watch experimenter hide toy in scale model room and then asked to find toy in real room

results: most 3 yr olds find toy, most 2.5 yr olds can't

conclusion: difficulty with dual representation - don't understand the model is a symbol for the room

Scale-Model Task follow up study

"shrinking machine" - believe room was actually shrunk, so no dual representation here so 2 1/2 yr olds succeed

deferred imitation

repetition of another's behavior hours or days after it has occurred

symbolic representation

use of one object to stand for another (like make believe play)

metacognition

ability to think about thinking