Developmental

Introduction

Wednesday 18 September 2024

12:58

Developmental psychology - the study of physical, cognitive, social, emotional and behavioural changes throughout the lifespan

• Most dramatic changes occur early in life, thus will focus on infancy and childhood

Aims of Developmental Psychology

1. Describe human development

2. Explain human development

3. Optimise human development

Major Developmental Themes

1. Continuity / Discontinuity

   1. Do children go through gradual changes or are they abrupt changes?

2. Stability / Change

   1. Do personality traits present in infancy persist throughout the lifespan - emphasising importance of early experiences on future development?

   2. Or, do family interactions, school experiences and acculturation modify personality?

3. Nature / Nurture

   1. Biological factors (maturation, inheritance)

   2. Impact of the environment and learning

Lifespan Development

Baltes' Model of Development - 3 Types of influence on development, not just chronological aging:

1. Normative age-graded influences - biological and environmental factors strongly linked to chronological age

   1. Puberty, starting school

1. Normative history-graded influences - things that happen to a generation / cohort

   1. WWII, Natural Disaster

1. Non-normative life events - things that are happening specifically to an individual

   1. Death of a parent, serious injury

How do we test for these influences?

• Age

• Cohort

• Time of testing

Research Designs

Cross-sectional studies

• Different participants, different ages, same time

  • E.g., comparing 1 and 3 year olds as to how good they are at building, what changes do we see?

• Cost effective, quick

• Individual differences between participants, cohort effects

  • E.g., a specific generation lived through a war, affecting their behaviour and therefore the ability to compare them to other generations

Longitudinal studies

• Same participants, different ages, different times

• High attrition rate - this biases the sample as people drop out

• Time consuming

• Original research question still viable at study completion?

Cohort studies

• Different participants, same ages, different historical time

  • E.g., the effect of the invention of television in 8yr olds born in 1940, 1970 and 2000)

• Time consuming

• Danger of research question becoming obsolete

• Age of child may affect results specifically

Cohort-sequential studies (covers cross sectional, cohort, longitudinal data)

• Different AND same participants, different AND same ages, different AND same historical time

  • E.g., effect of preschool programmes on children born in 1990, 2000, 2010, follow them from 3-12 years of age

• High attrition rate

• Time consuming

• Question may become obsolete

Twin Studies

• Monozygotic twins (~100% identical)

• Dizygotic or Fraternal (50% identical)

  • Confounding effect of environment - treated more similarly than siblings

Adoption Studies

• Rearing environment from adoptive parents

• Genetic inheritance from biological parents

• Whom do they resemble most?

  • Tend to be adopted into similar environments, treated similarly still!

  • Cross-fostering experiments with other animals can be done (rats, mice) - swap offspring (cannot be done with humans)

    • E.g., study of mice singing studied if innate or learned - when swapped, mice still did the song they were born with! Evidence of genetic influence in mice

Nature AND Nurture

• Genotype-environment interaction

  • E.g., child's temperament affects interaction with parents

Evolution and Development

Evolutionary Psychology - Does human ancestry tell us about ourselves now?

• E.g., nomadic hunter-gather environment

  • How we are at spatial mapping dependent on who was responsible for this (biological sex - males traditionally hunted while the females gathered food)

    • Spatial mapping -> hunting and tracking animals (males better)

    • Remembering locations -> finding and gathering food (females better)

• Evolutionary Developmental Psychology

  • E.g., play differences in girls and boys

    • More rough play in boys pinpointed to evolutionary demands and how work was divided back in the day

  • However, cannot say 100% that this is due to the roles we had during evolution - cultural differences could be true reason, boys and girls are treated differently

EXAMPLE STUDY:

• Young chimpanzee females more likely to carry stick or rock 'dolls' than males

• Concluded that this behaviour is innate as they live in a society without cultural influences of human world

  • BUT, does this mean this behaviour is innate in humans?

  • We are placing human behaviours onto non-human creatures, they have a different society to us

  • Female chimpanzees use tools more often than male chimps anyway, it may be carried for other reasons

  • They could also just be copying behaviours

Cross Cultural Influences

• E.g., motor milestones - assumed to be universal (e.g., by WHO), but not the case! Cultural conventions impact upon these:

  • Cultural practices impact upon development (e.g., encouraged to sit earlier / massaged vs restrained for long periods of time)

Culture and Development

How does culture affect developmental views?

• E.g., tests designed by one culture to test intelligence in another?

Over emphasis on particular culture to describe 'universal' human development (WEIRD science)

• Scientists are products of their culture

Face Perception

Wednesday 2 October 2024

22:13

Sensation - information about environment picked up by sensory receptors and transmitted to brain

Perception - interpretation by the brain of this input; how we understand the events, objects and people in our environment

Visual Perception Development

Visual Acuity - clarity of vision at distance

• Poor at birth, rapid increase in first 6 months

• Near adult levels by 1 year

  • Measured in infants via paddles which vary in distance between vertical black and white striped lines

Visual Scanning - being able to track and search objects

• <2 months - cannot track moving objects smoothly

• 1 month - focus on limited features of shape, particularly outside edges

• 2 months - start to focus on internal features

Colour Vision

• Newborns can distinguish between white and red, but not other colours

• 1 month - look longer at brighter, bolder colours

• 4 months - close to adult ability

How do we test perceptual abilities?

Preference Tests

• Present two stimuli at same time

• Measure how long infant looks at each

• Does infant look at one more than the other?

  • Infant can discriminate between stimuli

• E.g., Fantz (1961) - babies shown different paddles with different materials on, found to prefer looking at more complex ones

  • (bars = proportion of time spent looking in comparison to other patterns)

Habituation Test

• Shown interesting stimuli repeatedly

  • Infant loses interest eventually (habituation)

• Change to a different stimulus

  • Infant shows renewed interest and looks again (dishabituation)

  • Shows they can tell the difference

• If so, the infant can tell the difference

Conditioning

• Repeatedly reward target behaviour e.g., sucking on a dummy

  • E.g., increase sucking rate when they see preferred stimuli (mum's face), conditions them to suck the dummy more when they see a preferred stimuli

• Infant becomes habituated to stimulus

• Stimulus has altered

  • If infant doesn't increase sucking rate = treats 2 stimuli as the same

  • Does increase sucking rate = distinguishes between 2 stimuli

Face Perception

Faces are arguably the most important visual stimulus used in human social communication!

• What can you tell from a face?

  • Species

  • Sex

  • Race

  • Identity

  • Mood, emotional states

  • Intent, truthfulness

• This has an impact on our social interactions

Nature vs Nurture - are faces special?

• Nativism - abilities from birth, innate, inborn

  • Special perceptual processes - processed different than other stimuli?

    • Organised at birth

• Empiricism - acquire overtime through experience, learned

  • Perceive faces as other objects are perceived

    • Becomes specialised after experience

Innate Face Preference

• Fantz (1961) - children preferred more complex patterns of faces

  • 1-15 week olds

  • Each face has the same proportion of dark to light, babies preferred the faces with more complex patterns

  • Evidence for innate preference of faces

• Maurer and Barrera (1981) - adds control for complexity

  • Control + two jumbled up faces, one symmetrical and one not

  • 1 month - no difference in looking time

  • 2 month - looked longer at 'natural face'

    • Shows that when born, interested in complex arrays and as they get more input from faces they prefer the natural face

• Goren et al (1975)

  • Used moving stimuli instead of static

  • Moved paddles in visual field of infant (blank, scrambled, schematic)

  • Newborns tracked schematic face more than other two

    • All that changed was how they were presented!

• Johnson et al (1991) replicated this effect with newborns

  • By 3 months, no longer tracked face more

  • Why does this face preference vanish?

• Johnson and Morton (1991) - 2 process model

  • CONSPEC - early system (subcortical structures) biases infants to orient towards faces

  • CONLEARN - later taken over by more mature system (visual cortex) and more precise recognition

    • SO, newborns rely on the CONSPEC system, but at 3 months CONLEARN takes over and they no longer use the broad face preference but instead rely on more precise and learned face recognition

What else can newborns do?

• Recognise identity of novel individuals

• Recognise eye-gaze

  • Look more at direct than averted gaze

• Recognise expressions

  • Infants dishabituated when expressions changed

• Prefer attractive faces

  • Newborns <1 week old looked longer at attractive faces

• Discriminate mother's face

  • Sucked more to keep mother's face on video at 1-4 days old!!

How are they doing it?

• Pascalis et al (1995)

  • Preference for mother's face disappeared when outside of face and hairline masked

  • Newborns use outer features to identify

• Turati et al (2006) repeated this

  • Could use both outer and inner features

  • BUT struggled more when outer features removed than inner features!

Infants show very early preferences for faces and even certain types of faces, they can also discriminate between different faces

• Does this mean face perception must be innate to some extent?

  • Suggestive, but not conclusive!

Sugita (2009)

• Monkeys not exposed to faces for first months of life still preferred them to inanimate objects! Suggests innate facial processing.

  • Before exposure - able to process both monkey and human faces

  • After exposure - only retained ability to discriminate between face types they'd been exposed to

Effect of the Environment

Narrowing of the perceptual window

• As we get older, face perception skills become more specialised

• Pascalis et al (2002)

  • 6 months - could discriminate between monkey faces and human faces

  • 9 months and adults - could only discriminate between human faces, can no longer tell difference between monkeys - people become specialists to the type of face they are exposed to

    • If exposed to monkey faces, 9 months could discriminate

'Other-race' effect

• Adults are poorer at discriminating faces of other races compared to own race

• 3 months - prefer own race faces due to exposure

  • Sangrigoli et al (2005) - Korean adults who were adopted at 3-9 year old into Caucasian families were more accurate with Caucasian faces

Better at discriminating and recognising female faces

• Effect of exposure to primary care giver?

• Preference for female faces in 3 month old, not newborn infants

• Fathers as primary caregivers = preference for male faces

• Institutionalised children showed deficits in identifying emotions in faces

• Children raised in abusive environment show bias for angry faces

Beyond Infancy

Adults are experts!

• Recognise faces as familiar within 0.5 seconds

• Retain information of large number of faces

  • 90% recognition of yearbook photos

  • Class size of up to 900, up to 35 years later

If adults are experts, when does this expertise fully emerge?

• Some research suggests not until 30+ years for face learning / recognition

• Why does it take so long?

Late maturation vs Early maturation

Face specific perceptual development theory (Late)

• Ongoing development of face specific perception mechanisms that continue to develop into late child and adolescence

• Face perception gets better because of increased exposure / experience with faces

General cognitive development theory

• Face perception matures early (4-5 years)

• Performance increases later as general cognitive mechanisms improve

When does it mature?

Early research suggested qualitative change later in childhood / adolescence

Adult mechanisms of face perception:

• Disproportionate inversion effect

  • More accurate when faces are upright

  • Larger effect for face versus non face objects

• Holistic / configural processing

  • Integration of information from all regions of the face

  • We code spacing between face and features

More recent research suggests adult-like mechanisms might be in place much earlier

• As young as 4-5 years

• Suggests that increases reflect development of other cognitive abilities (concentration, attention, memory)

Susilo (2013)

• Tested over 2000 18-33 year olds (large sample)

• Controlled for non face visual recognition, sex and own race bias

  • Participants had to match study with test

• Positive association between age and facial recognition abilities

• Conclude results support late maturation hypothesis

  • BUT this is only tested at the older age, not giving insight into how children actually process

Genetic Differences in Facial Recognition

• Twin studies reveal strong genetic influence

Depends on the face or the task?

• Differences between processing of familiar and unfamiliar faces

  • If you give someone a facial recognition task with people that they know, they will do better!

Neurodivergent face perception

Autism and social cognition impacts upon:

• Recognising familiar people

• Remembering faces

• Interpreting eye-gaze and emotions

Williams Syndrome

• Process unfamiliar faces atypically (processed as more friendly and approachable than other people may do)

• Prolonged face gaze

Prosopagnosia (face blindness)

• Damage or abnormalities in right fusiform gyrus (stroke, brain injury)

• Congenital prosopagnosia - from birth, appears to run in families

  • Differing degrees of severity - may not even recognise own face

Executive Function Development

Thursday 10 October 2024

09:52

Three core executive components in the 'domain general' (top down processes) (Miyake et al, 2000)

• Inhibition - controlling attention / behaviour / thoughts and or emotion to override a prepotent response

• Working memory - holding information in mind while simultaneously processing it

• Cognitive flexibility - changing perspectives / approaches to a problem, flexibly adjusting to new demands / rules / priorities

The Development of Inhibitory Control

Very difficult for children!

• Rapid growth in early childhood

• 3-6 years: button press response inhibition task, accuracy increased by 30%

  • E.g., pressing a button for a specific stimuli continuously, when a different stimuli appears they have to inhibit pressing the button

Continues to mature into early adulthood

• Longitudinal data - growth curve modelling - continued maturation of error-processing abilities supports protracted development of inhibitory control over adolescence

The Development of Working Memory

Working memory takes a long time to develop - Backward digit span assesses this (numbers said to participant, they have to recall this backwards)

• Infancy - a WMC of 1 item at 6 months

• Problem - tasks for infants can't provide comparable data to children and adult data

• School aged children - WMC of 1.5-2.5 items

The Development of Cognitive Flexibility

Develops later than inhibition and working memory

• Classic task: Wisconsin card sorting task

  • Many more dimensions

  • Rule changes, but as a participant you are not told and you have to work out what the new rule is

• Dimensional change card sort test by Zelazo much simpler, only one dimension

  • Sort cards by item / colour at first

  • Rule then switches, but cannot do this (perseveration - cannot apply new rule once a rule is established)

• By 4 years - can sort by colour or shape, but can't switch

• Middle childhood / early adolescence (7-21 years) - shift costs decreased with each age group, but 15 years did not differ from adults

Comparing the Developmental Trajectories of all EFs

Paper compared participants' developmental trajectories on different executive functioning tasks

• Inhibition and WM show similar developmental trajectories

• Controlled for IQ and SES

  • Age and IQ statistically correlated

  • IQ linked to general cognitive performance (better at tasks if you show better general cognitive ability)

  • As these are removed, can look at effect of age ONLY

Trajectories are very different across the lifespan for different executive functions.

However, there is strong evidence that all executive functions are strongly correlated, potentially meaning that they are not as separate as once thought

Fractionation of EF

• Too many tasks testing the same concept - which is best?

• Tasks are complex and multi-dimensional - make it difficult to pinpoint the specific skills being assessed?

• Switches in which EFs predict behaviour

  • Tower of Hanoi - children younger than 4 predicted by inhibition; children older than 4 predicted by WM

    • Executive functions develop at different rates!

• Conceptual ambiguity

  • Perseveration - is this because of an inability to inhibit or an inability to switch rules?

Maturation of the Prefrontal Cortex

Brain Development

• The brain reaches approximately 90% of adult volume by age 6

• Early postnatal period - level of connectivity far exceeds that of adults

• This is gradually pruned back via competitive processes that are influenced by the experiences of the organism

• Structural changes in grey and white matter continue through childhood and adolescence

• These changes in structure parallel changes in functional organisation - also reflected in behaviour

Gogtay et al. (2004) - representation of when areas of the brain come online

• Brain develops from the back to front

Structural PFC Development

• Researchers have observed that structural PFC maturation consists of

  • Progressive changes (myelination, neuron proliferation, synaptogenesis)

  • Regressive changes (cell death, synaptic pruning, loss in grey matter)

• The physical maturation of the frontal lobe parallels the advances in cognitive abilities throughout childhood and adolescence

1. Myelination - coating the axons with a fatty substance. Acts as an insulation on electrical wires, speeding up the transmission of signals between neurons. Crucial for connectivity and efficient brain function

2. Neuron proliferation - neurons multiply at a very fast rate, most active during prenatal development, linked to neurogenesis

3. Synaptogenesis - Neurons form connections, called synapses, with other neurons. This happens rapidly during early brain development - the 'wiring'

4. Cell death - Natural and controlled process where cells die off as part of normal development - efficient brain function

5. Synaptic pruning - eliminating unused or weaker synapses in the brain. It occurs after synaptogenesis, and is part of how the brain becomes more efficient - occurs especially during adolescence

6. Grey matter - contains most of the brain neurons and synapses

Infancy (PFC Development)

• 6-12 months: increases in dendritic trees in layer 3 of the PFC

• 12-18 months: peak in synaptogenesis in the middle frontal gyrus

• Synaptogenesis in the PFC in the first decade of life; reduction in synapses through adolescence and adulthood

How does this look relative to other areas of the brain?

• Cerebral blood volume in the frontal region increases linearly from birth - 8-9 months of age. Exponential increase seen in the occipital, parietal and temporal regions only within the first 2.5 months

• The spread of myelination in vivo 1st year of life: cerebellum, pons, internal capsule first to myelinate, occipital and parietal lobes 4-6 months, frontal and temporal lobes at 6-8 months

Middle Childhood and Adolescence (PFC Development)

• Increases in grey matter volume of the frontal and parietal lobes - peak 10 years in girls, 12 years in boys, followed by a decrease in these lobes

• Longitudinal data - loss of grey matter density starting at puberty in the sensorimotor areas, and then spreading over the frontal cortex (rostrally) and the parietal and then temporal cortex (caudally)

• Synaptic pruning?

• Potential alternative - losing grey matter, gaining myelinated white matter, increasing connectivity

  • Refinement, not loss of grey matter but connectivity driving increase in executive function

What does this tell us about the maturation rate of the PFC?

• Prolonged maturation exists between the structural and metabolic changes in the PFC in the first years of life

• Relatively late maturation of the frontal lobe in comparison to other brain regions

• Connectivity evident within pre school years

The Link between PFC development and executive functions

• What are the developmental changes in the PFC that underpin the improvement in cognitive functions?

• What role do regions beyond the dorsolateral PFC play in subserving cognitive functions?

Infancy and Executive Functions

• Very difficult to study structural development in children

  • Consent

  • Movement

  • Comfort

• 5-12 month old infants recruit the DL-PFC when holding objects in visual WM

• Go/Nogo task in 4-6 year olds and adults

  • Adults - R frontal and parietal regions during inhibition (no go)

  • Children - R frontal and parietal regions during go, and no go

• 3 year olds who are able to switch on the DCCS showed a bilateral increase in oxygenation in the ventral and dorsolateral PFC

Functional connectivity of the PFC

How different areas of the brain communicate and work together during specific tasks or at rest - what is the functional link between brain areas?

• fMRI - children display weaker functional connectivity between the lateral PFC, ACC, inferior parietal cortex during cognitive flexibility tasks

  • 3 years - weak neural interactions within the frontal cortex and unrefined frontoparietal connectivity

  • 4.5 years - stronger neural connections and a refined pathways with efficient connectivity

What do these findings mean?

• Confirms the involvement of the PFC in early EF

• The PFC doesn't work in isolation

Are the functional brain networks that support EFs in adulthood in place by childhood?

• Qualitative changes?

  • Patterns of brain activity are more diffused in your children or show distinct neural patterns relative to adults

• Quantitative changes?

  • Strengthening of region to region connections, consistent set of brain regions

Englehardt et al. (2019)

Are these brain areas working in isolation for your adulthood? Do they merge together in certain tasks as you get older?

For each task is there overlapping brain activation?

• Quantitative shift in neural correlates - enough ROIs overlapping showing same child and adulthood patterns

• Qualitative shift - mass areas that aren't activated at all by children

Both shifts

Their findings revealed that the same brain regions activated in adults during EF tasks are also engaged in children by middle childhood. This suggests that the core neural architecture supporting executive functions is in place by this developmental stage. Consequently, improvements in EFs from middle childhood to adulthood are likely due to quantitative changes—such as increased efficiency or strength of neural connections—rather than qualitative changes in the organization of these networks.

Functional Connectivity

Shows activation patterns from adolescents to adults

• Tasks verging on same brain regions

Yellow = percentage of overlapping voxels

Red = unique to one task

Efficient fronto-parietal connectivity is established at 20-24.

With new technology and new techniques, we can take a more developmental perspective of what the brain looks like in regard to executive functions - we can work out what the differentiation is in regards to the tasks

Language Development

Thursday 17 October 2024

09:45

There are a variety of different ways that humans and non-human species communicate verbally and non verbally

Psychology of language has a huge history and its own avenue - psycholinguistics

• Language - the comprehension and use of words and sentences to convey ideas and information, which can be spoken, written or signed

• Communication - the transmission of information between the source and a receiver using a signalling system

Is Language uniquely Human?

Research into communication in non-human species

• Birds, bees, apes and monkeys, dolphins and whales

Many attempts to teach language to other animals

• Kanzi - chimp taught to use abstract symbol keyboard by foster mother, at 2 years old he understood that an abstract symbol stood for an object, action or idea - on par with a 2/3 year old

Noam Chomsky:

• "A human language is a system of remarkable complexity. To come to know a human language would be an extraordinary intellectual achievement for a creature not specifically designed to accomplish this task. A normal child acquires this knowledge on relatively slight exposure and without specific training. He can then quite effortlessly make use of an intricate structure of specific rules and guiding principles to convey his thoughts and feelings to others, arousing in them novel ideas and subtle perceptions and judgments." 

Faculty of Language

Fitch (2010) - Language is in multiple separate components, but they all interact

• FLB - faculty of language in the broad sense

  • Speech perception

  • Vision

  • Facial control

  • Manual control

  • Memory

  • Navigation

  • Executive function

  • Theory of mind

• FLN - faculty of language in the narrow sense

  • Speech and verbal production

  • Hierarchical syntax

  • Pragmatics

  • Mitteilungsbedurnis

These components are unique to humans (what Kanzi couldn't do) - humans name, comment and volunteer information about the world.

Components of Language

• Phonology - the interpretation of speech sounds in a particular language

• Semantics - concerned with meaning

• Syntax - the structure of sentences

• Pragmatics - appropriate and effective communication

Phonology - The 'Building Blocks' of Speech

Phonology - the interpretation of speech sounds in a particular language

• Phoneme - the smallest unit that, when changed, changes the meaning of a word

Phonetics - the production and perception of speech sounds in any language, concerned with the acoustics and articulation of those sounds

• Phone - speech sound

Modern English alphabet has 26 letters, but many more sounds (international phonetic alphabet)

Semantics

Semantics - concerned with meaning, includes words (lexical knowledge) and word combinations

Word - an arbitrary signal that refers to a particular concept

• Contains form and meaning - words occupy the 'meeting point' between these levels

• Types of words: nouns, verbs, adjectives etc.

• Probably the primary object of speech perception

Morphology

Morphology - structure of a given language's morphemes

• Morpheme - smallest unit of linguistic meaning or function

How Do Children Acquire Word Meaning?

Word learning biases - whole object constraint

• Words refer to whole object rather than parts of object

Shape bias - generalise to other objects that are the same shape, rather than other attributes (texture, colour, material etc.)

• Aids early noun learning

Barrett's Multi-Route Model

Referential words - used in a variety of contexts

• E.g., 'More' - could refer to requesting more food or more repetition of actions

• Mapped onto mental representations of objects or actions

Context-bound words - only specific context

• 'Duck' - hit duck off edge of bath

• Mapped onto global construct of the event

• Gradually analysed into individual categories (people, objects, actions, relations)

Gleitman's Syntactic Boot-Strapping Hypothesis

Sensitive to syntactic and semantic correspondences from early age

Extract meanings of new words from syntactic clues

• Number of 'noun phrase' arguments or participants

  • Mary kicked the ball (transitive: subject + object)

  • Tom is sleeping (intransitive: subject, no object)

How do we Test this?

Observational studies of spontaneous speech

• Look for particular patterns or structures ('sheeps')

Artificial language in experiments:

• Look! Cookie Monster is 'gorping' Big Bird

• Look! Cookie Monster and Big Bird are 'gorping'

• Measure looking times at 2 different videos

• Children look longer at appropriate video

Syntax

Syntax - the structure of sentences

Pragmatics

Pragmatics - appropriate and effective communication. Knowing how to use language appropriately in social situations

Three key aspects:

1. Using language for different purposes

   1. E.g., 'I would like you to give me a biscuit' (requesting) vs 'Give me a biscuit' (demanding)

2. Changing language according to the needs of a listener or situation

   1. E.g., 'friend vs lecturer vs the King'

3. Following rules for conversations and storytelling

   1. E.g., staying on topic and taking turns

What is Typical Language Development?

Semantic Development

Receptive knowledge - comprehension

• 6 + months

• 4 + years - understand jokes, riddles, double meanings etc

Expressive knowledge - production

• 10-12 months - first word, usually nouns

• 12-18 months - one-word stage

• ~18 months - approx. 50 words

• 18-22 months - vocabulary spurt, 50-300 words in a few months

  • Largely nouns and adjectives e.g., teddy dancing, but function words omitted e.g., my teddy is dancing

• 2-6 years - vocabulary continues to increase

Syntactical Development (Grammar)

~18-24 months: 2 word stage

• Move from word-gesture combinations to word-word combinations

• Telegraphic speech - only elements needed to get message across

  • E.g., 'more milk' 'teddy dancing'

24 months+

• Longer utterances and increasing grammar, 3-word sentences

  • Subject-verb-object

• ~2-3 years grammar is okay

4 years

• Increasingly complex grammar

  • Plural: add -s

  • Past tense: add -ed

    • Over-regularisation - applying regular rules to irregular words e.g., 'the boy is running… yesterday he runned'

  • Passive voice e.g., 'was given by' vs 'he gave'

Why is it important to know what Typical Development is?

Attention, Listening and Understanding

• Is aware when a message is unclear and comments or asks for explanation

• Follows longer instructions that are not familiar

  • E.g., put the stripy folder that's on top of the cupboard into the bottom drawer of my desk

• Identifies clearly when they haven't understood

  • E.g., 'what's maize? 'get a blue what?'

• Understands 2-3 part spoken instructions

  • E.g., 'finish your picture, then sit on the carpet and look at a book'

Vocabulary

• Compares words, the way they look, sound or mean

  • E.g., 'there are two words 'sea' at the beach, and you 'see' with your eyes

• Knows words can be put into groups and can give common examples in them

  • E.g., animals: dog, cat, horse etc

• Uses a wide range of verbs to express their thoughts, or about cause and effect

  • E.g., 'I wonder what she's thinking' or 'If we run we should get there on time but we might arrive later'

• Uses sophisticated words but the meaning might not always be accurate

  • E.g., 'my bedroom was meticulous'

Grammar

• Uses different ways to join phrases to help explain or justify an event

  • E.g., 'I'm older than you so I will go first'

• Uses long and complex sentence structures

  • E.g., 'the big dog barked whenever I knocked on the door'

• Uses well-formed sentences but with some errors

  • E.g., 'I played with Zoe in the park' and 'I falled down'

• Uses regular and unusual word endings

  • E.g., 'Walked or fell'

Story-telling and Narratives

• Describes events but not always joined together or in the right order

  • E.g., 'I went on the top of the bus with Dad. That big slide is scary. We taked the ball as well'

• Stories have a good structure with a distinct plot, an exciting event, clear resolution and conclusion

  • E.g., '…and everyone got home safely which was great'

• Tells elaborate entertaining stories which are full of detailed descriptions

• Tells stories that set the scene, have a basic plot and a sequence of events

Conversation and Social Interaction

• Uses language to ask, negotiate, give opinions and discuss ideas and feelings

  • E.g., 'Are we going to Nana's today? Can I take teddy with me? He will be sad by himself.'

• Uses formal language when appropriate in some familiar situations

  • E.g., showing a visitor around school

• Uses different language depending on where they are, who they are with and what they are doing

  • E.g., formal style with the headteacher in school; relaxed and informal with family at home; and 'cool' language with friends in the park

• Takes turns to talk, listen and respond in two-way conversations and groups

Atypical Language Development

Relationship between Speech, Language and Communication

Speech - the production of vocal sounds

Language - the comprehension and use of words and sentences to convey ideas and information, which can be spoken, written or signed

Communication - the transmission of information between the source and a receiver using a signaling system

Speech, Language and Communication Needs

Wide age range, wide range of severity

Mild delay in one or more areas - short term

• Support - catch up with peers

Long-term and persistent

• Direct and specific intervention (SLT)

Pattern and impact changes over time

Developmental Language Disorder (DLD)

The most prevalent type of Special Educational Need

• Difficulty in one or many of the language areas

What are the impacts of language disorders?

St Clair et al. (2010)

• Children with DLD / SLI assessed at multiple times between age 7 and 16

• Reading accuracy in individuals with DLD / SI develops in parallel to TD children

• But ability is consistently lower than TD peers

Why may children with DLD have more social problems?

Why may children with DLD have poorer emotional wellbeing?

The Object Concept + Mental Representations

Saturday 11 January 2025

21:16

The Object Concept

Object permanence - objects continue to exist even when they are out of sight

• The occluded object retains its spatial and physical properties

• The occluded object is still subject to physical laws

Mental representation is necessary!

• Planning

• Deferred imitation

Piaget's Theory

Sensorimotor Stage (0-2 years)

• 0-24 months

• Learns to differentiate self from environment

• Starts to understand causality, and form internal mental representations

• Object permanence attained at 12 months, full internal representations by 18-24 months

6 Sensorimotor Substages:

1. Reflex activity (0-1 months)

   • Practice innate reflexes (e.g., sucking, looking)

1. Primary circular reactions (1-4 months)

   • Simple behaviours derived from basic reflexes

   • Start repeating behaviour (e.g., thumb sucking)

   • Focused on body

   • No differentiation between self and outside world

1. Secondary circular reactions (4-10 months)

   • 'Secondary' behaviours = own, not reflexes

   • Start to focus on objects

   • Begin to change surroundings intentionally

     • E.g., kick legs, hit mobile, kick legs again

   • Establish connection between body movement and external environment

1. Coordination of secondary circular reactions (10-12 months)

   • Engage with objects using a variety of actions

   • Combine actions to achieve goals and solve novel problems

     • Some evidence of means-ends behaviour e.g., move something out of way to reach and get toy

     • But, not insightful, driven by trial and error (limited by existing repertoire of actions, lack flexibility)

   • A-not-B errors until 12 months

     • Egocentrism

1. Tertiary circular reactions (12-18 months)

   • Still repetitive or circular behaviours

   • Discover the properties of objects and the environment

   • Understand objects through trial and error

     • Not yet intentional or insightful

   • Improvements in problem-solving

     • Experiment with new actions, modify unsuccessful actions

   • Still lack internal representations

1. Internal representation (18-24 months)

   • Now has mental representation of the world

     • Can think and plan actions

     • Deferred imitation

   • Solve novel problems insightfully

Piaget's Observations on Mental Representations

Object permanence

• Begin to search for errors around 8-9 months

• A not B error until 12 months

Goal-directed, structured behaviour: planning

• Not until stage 6

  • E.g., Lucienne versus Jacqueline and chain/box problem

Deferred imitation (enduring mental representation)

• Copying behaviour after a delay

• Not until stage 6

Critiques of Piaget

Methods: Observational methods, often with own children

• Quantitative, experimental data rare

• 'Clinical method' rather than standardised

Confounds:

• Motor coordination and motor planning deficits

  • Inability to perform coordinated actions (means-end)

• Memory deficits

• Communication - biased by cues

Younger infants could show some evidence if:

• Simplify procedure in experimental studies

  • Change procedure

  • Change the dependent variable

Earlier than Piaget predicted?

• Basic object permanence

• Planning

• Deferred imitation

Example: A-not-B Error

Piaget says - don't spoil until 12 months

• Slight design tweaks can lead to different results

  • Butterworth (1977)

  • Smith & Thelen (2003)

Butterworth (1977)

• 3 conditions

  • Normal design

  • Covered but visible

  • Visible and uncovered

• Errors in all 3 conditions, even when object is covered but visible

  • Reflects lack of coordination, not necessarily lack of object permanence

Smith & Thelen (2003)

• One variation had infant stand instead of sit during 'B' trial

  • 10 month infants performed like 12 month old

  • Standing made the 'A' position less salient

Methodological Changes

Darkness rather than occlusion by other objects (visual vs manual search)

• Shown object within reach, lights turned off

• Infants as young as 5 months will grasp for out of sight objects

• But still just performing 'reaching action' (extension of ongoing action of reproduction of previous action)

Take away the necessity of reaching!

Bower (1982)

• Infants a few months old, shown object, moved in front of object, returned to original position

• 2 conditions: object still in place versus empty space

• Monitored child's heart rate

• Piaget: too young to have information about objects that are no longer present = no reaction

• Bower: faster heart rate (more surprise) in second (empty) condition

Baillargeon et al (1985)

• Should look longer at the impossible event if they find it surprising

• Drawbridge and solid box

  • Experimental condition: box behind drawbridge

  • Control: box next to drawbridge

• ?????

• Conclusion: infants expected the screen to stop against the box, infants understood the box continued to exist

• Contrary to Piaget: infants as young as 5M show object permanence, not an extension or repetition of previous action

• Supports idea that failure on previous tests result of interaction with other cognitive abilities

Baillargeon (2004)

From early age, infants  'interpret physical events in accord with general principles of continuity and solidarity'

• As young as 2.5 months

• These principles are innate or babies born with ability to acquire knowledge about object properties very quickly

Criticisms of the VOE approach?

• Only indicates limited awareness of events (i.e., perceives a difference)

• Or perceptual preference for novelty but not understanding

• Depends on what we're using (e.g., overall looking time versus social looking)

• Do looking preferences really tell us about what babies know?

Clifton et al. (1991)

Presented 6M olds with small (required one hand grasp) and large (2 hand grasp) objects

• Each object made identifying sound

• Infants made appropriate grip to reach for objects in darkness

• Authors conclude this is based on mental representations

Claxton et al. (2003)

Differences in motor patterns in adults for planned actions

• Precise actions = slower approach

10M infants encouraged to throw ball or fit it into a hole

• If motor patterns determined by ball properties, should find no difference

• If determined by upcoming action, should find a difference

• Reaching action slower for precise action

Willatts (1989)

Toy out of reach on a cloth

• Cloth and toy blocked by a barrier

• 9 month old children performed sequence of actions to get toy

• Many on the 1st attempt

  • Novel, planned actions

  • Mental representation of the world used to organise behaviour

Meltzoff & Moore (1994)

At 6 weeks old, some infants saw adults make facial gesture, some saw neutral expression

• Day later, those who saw gesture were more likely to perform it to a neutral face

Meltzoff (1995)

At 14M and 16M, experimenter performed series of actions with objects

• Both ages more likely to reproduce observed actions than those who did not see them

  • Even after a 4 month delay!!

Barr et al. (1996)

Infants saw series of actions with puppet and had to repeat after a 24H delay

• Children given 3 repetitions of actions

  • 6M = no difference from control

  • Supports Piaget's view

• Additional 6M olds given 6 repetitions of actions

  • 6M = now score significantly higher than control

  • Evidence of deferred imitation in 6M olds

Patel et al. (2013)

Context matters

• 6M, 8M, 24M tested using puppet paradigm, 24 hour delay

• Varied the context during retrieval (auditory and visual)

  • Full flexibility / generalisation not achieved until 12M

Conclusion

We agree with Piaget's statements that:

• Children not born with fully developed object concept, but develop it over time

• Certain behaviours / abilities seem to emerge in similar order

BUT we disagree with some of his statements and instead believe that:

• Children develop some aspects of mental representation earlier than Piaget suggested

  • Contrary to the discrete stage view?

Number Concept

Sunday 12 January 2025

10:23

What is the number concept?

• Numerosity, counting, arithmetic

• What are the RULES?

The 5 Counting Principles

Gelman and Gallistel (1978) - 5 principles govern counting:

• One-to-one principle

  • One and only one tag or 'counting word' for each item in the set

• Stable-order principle

  • Tags must be used in the same way e.g., 1,2,3, vs 1,3,2 (rules followed)

• Cardinal principle

  • The tag of the final object in the set represents the total number of items e.g., knowing the word 'two' refers to sets of two entities

• Order irrelevance principle

  • Result the same regardless of order you count items in

• Abstraction principle

  • These principles can be applied to any collection of objects (including intangible objects)

  • Not 'labelling' (like the label 'cat')

Children's Knowledge of the Principles

Implicit knowledge of the principles

• Can't articulate this knowledge, but follow rules

5 principles attainable by the age of 5 (some achievable by 3)

What evidence do we have of this?

• How do we test it indirectly?

• How do we control for performance demands?

Error Detection Task - Gelman and Meck (1983)

Children monitor performance of a 'puppet'

• Don't have to count themselves (relieves possible restriction of performance demands)

3-5 year olds tested on 3 principles:

One-to one principle - 3 types of trials

• Correct

• In-error (skipped or double-counted)

• Pseudoerror

Stable-order principle - 2 types of trials

• Correct

• In-error

  • Reversed - 1,3,2,4

  • Randomly ordered - 3,1,4,2

  • Skipped tags - 1,3,4

Cardinality - 2 types of trials

• Correct

• In-error

  • Nth value +1

  • Less than N

  • Irrelevant feature of object e.g., colour

Results:

• Very high accuracy on correct trials

  • One-to-one: 100%

  • Stable-order: 96%+

  • Cardinal 96%+

• High accuracy on incorrect trials

  • One-to-one: 67%+ (3yrs), 82%+ (4yrs)

  • Stable-order: 76%+ (3yrs), 96%+ (4-5yrs)

  • Cardinal: 85%+ (3yrs), 99%+ (4-5yrs)

• Pseudo-errors detected as peculiar, but not incorrect (95%+ accuracy)

  • Even able to articulate why in some cases

  • Show understanding of order-irrelevance

• Older children performed better BUT success rates not affected by set size, even for young children

Conclusions:

• Children as young as 3 understand the principles

  • Even though they can't articulate them

• Understanding demonstrated even in set sizes too big for children to count

• Children show implicit knowledge of these principles

Baroody (1984)

Testing order-irrelevance and cardinality in 5-7 year olds

Argument - ability to understand that tags can be assigned arbitrarily doesn't imply understanding that:

• Differently ordered counts produce the same cardinal designation

Children counting themselves (not error detection)

Children shown 8 items

• Count them left to right and then indicate the cardinal value of set

• Then asked 'can you make this number 1?' (pointing to right-most item)

• 'We got N counting this way, what do you think we would get counting the other way?'

  • During this, they could no longer see the array, had to predict

Results:

• All but 1 child could recount in the opposite direction

• BUT, only 45% of 5 year olds and 87% of 7 year olds were successful in prediction task

Conclusion:

• Understanding of order-irrelevance develops with age

• Young children's understanding of principles overestimated

'Principles-after' concept

Gelman, Meck & Merkin (1986)

Task affects how children perform

• Failure the result of misinterpretation of instructions, not lack of understanding

Procedure - 3 groups

• Baroody replication

• Count 3x: 3 opportunities to count first

• Altered question: 'How many will there be?' or 'What will you get?'

Overestimate children's ability? Some children just giving the last number in the set?

Underestimate children's ability?

Give 'N' task and knower levels

Child asked to give 'N' number of items

Up to '4-knowers' called 'subset' knowers

• Only know how a subset of numbers work

Switch to CP-knower

• Can solve flexibly across sets, not restricted

• Really understand how counting works, evidenced across a variety of tasks

CONCLUSIONS SO FAR

Young children demonstrate some understanding of counting principles

• Implicit knowledge (can't articulate)

• Young children might be limited by larger sets

The task matters!

• Counting versus error-detection

• Subtle changes in type of questions used

• 'Give N' most typically used to date

How much of numerical knowledge is innate?

Where does our numerical knowledge come from?

Empiricism vs Nativism

• Empiricism - knowledge comes from experience, develops gradually

• Nativism - innate understanding of some aspects of number concept, 'core knowledge'

What evidence?

• What do young infants show understanding of numbers?

• What about nonhuman animals (no language, no exposure to number system)?

Habituation Studies

Can use with very young infants to gauge innate knowledge

Procedure example:

• Habituation to 4 dots

• Followed by exposure to 2 dots

Results:

• Looked longer at 2 dots

Conclusion

• Understand numerosity?

• Basic discrimination?

Xu and Spelke (2000)

• Larger numbers, controlled for other properties of the arrays

• 6M discriminated between 8 and 16 dots

  • Replicated with 4vs8 and 16vs32

• Infants can't do 3:2 ratios until 9 months (e.g., 8vs12)

• Ability to detect more precise ratios continue with development

Addition and Subtraction - Wynn (1992)

• 32 5-month old infants

• Looking time procedure

• Shown different mathematical outcomes

Discrimination or numerical concept?

Pre-test trials - no difference in looking times to 1 or 2 objects

Test trials - infants looked longer at the 'incorrect' result

• 1+1 group looked longer at 1, than 2 puppets

• 2-1 group looked longer at 2 than 1 puppet

2 hypotheses:

• Infants compute precise results of simple additions / subtractions

• Infants expect arithmetical operation to result in numerical change (no expectation of size / or direction of change)

Experiment 3:

• 1+1 = 2 OR 3

• Infants preferred 3 in the trials, but not pre-test trials

Conclusions:

• 5 month olds can calculate precise results of simple arithmetical operations

• Infants possess true numerical concepts

  • Suggests humans innately possess capacity to perform these calculations

• Replicated with larger sets

BUT: Wakeley et al (2000)

3 Experiments

• Replications of Wynn (1992) experiments 1&2

• Subtraction counterpart to Wynn's experiment 3

  • 3-1 = 1 or 2

  • Controls for possibility that preferred answer is always greater number of items

Results

• NO systematic preference for 'incorrect' versus 'correct'

Conclusions

• Earlier findings of numerical competence not replicated

  • Review of literature = inconsistent results

• Infants' reactions are variable

  • Numerical competencies not robust

• Gradual and continual progress in abilities with age

Wynn's Response

Procedural differences affected attentiveness of infants

• Use of computer program versus experimenter to determine start

• Didn't ensure infant saw complete trial

• Exclusion of 'fussy' infants higher in Wynn's (and other) studies

Replication and debate key to science!

Additional Evidence?

Are core numerical abilities shared with other animals?

• Can discriminate amounts (sounds, arrays, food)

Counting?

Arithmetic operations?

• Core knowledge hypothesis

Where are we now?

Nativist view dominant

• Born with some innate ability, which expands with age / experience

• This inborn ability is shared with other animals

BUT experience and culture is still important

• Cross-culturally - language, counting practices impact representation and processing of number

• Within-cultures - number-talk from parents predicts CP knowledge, related to later performance in school

Conclusions

• Children as young as 3 seem to have implicit knowledge of counting principles

• Evidence of innate abilities

  • Numerosity (from habituation studies)

  • Arithmetical operations

• How robust are the above?

  • Also evidence for gradual accumulation of this knowledge

  • Born with limited ability, which then expands with age / experience?

• Task and procedure have large impact on results and age at which we see these abilities

Social Learning + Development

Thursday 14 November 2024

09:46

Vygotsky: Learning in a Social Context

Learning is the result of the interaction between a child and a more knowledgeable individual

• Culture provides the context within which interactions take place

• Language provides the means through which meanings are shared

'Cognition', 'memory', 'attention' are not only individual characteristics

• Cognitive processes directly influenced by type of culture

  • E.g., access to formal education

'A human being is not at all a skin sack filled with reflexes, and the brain is not a hotel for a series of conditioned reflexes accidentally stopping in'

Zone of Proximal Development

ZDP - difference between actual performance and potential performance

• How the child learns with help of others

• At level beyond existing skill (but not too far)

Language and Thought

Through language that the child develops as learner and thinker

Importance of the external monologue

• Transition from language as a tool for communication to a tool for thought

• Help organise and plan behaviour

• Internalised to become inner speech ~7 years

Contrast to Piaget

• Saw monologue as evidence of egocentrism

Bruner and Scaffolding

How knowledge is passed from expert adult to novice child

• Recruitment - engage interest of child

• Reduction of degrees of freedom - reduce numbers of acts required, simplify

• Direction maintenance - keep motivation up

• Marking critical features - highlight relevant features

• Demonstration - modelling solutions

Uniquely Human?

“The big Vygotskian idea is that what makes human cognition different is not more individual brainpower, but rather the ability of humans to learn through other persons and their artifacts, and to collaborate with others in collective activities”

Many of the behaviours that distinguish us are supported by social learning

• Cultures (e.g., music, language, art, fashion, history)

• Tools and technology (e.g., computers, internet, cars)

Many animals socially learn, some even exhibit cultures or traditions

• Cultures not as complex

• No evidence for cumulative culture

Differences in what / how much is copied?

• Emulation - end results

• Imitation - actions and end results

Cultural intelligence hypothesis

• Humans have evolved special social-cognitive skills

  • E.g., theory of mind, social learning, communication, cooperation, imitation, teaching)

Relies on input from demonstrator and observer

• Role of skilled 'demonstrator'

• Scaffolding, teaching, 'natural pedagogy'

Shared intentionality? Or social affiliation?

• Natural tendency to want to share information or combine efforts toward common goals

Role of the observer: Child

'Primed to attend to demonstrator's cues

Copying to higher level of fidelity

• Imitation vs Emulation (and other forms)

• Over imitation (copy relevant and irrelevant features)

Able to learn even 'opaque' technologies and arbitrary cultural customs

Self-Recognition

Mirror test

• 16 infants each in 6 age groups (9, 12, 15, 18, 21 and 24 months)

• Compared 'no-rouge' and 'rouge' conditions

Temporal Sense of Self

'I am the same self that I was yesterday'

Povinelli et al (1996)

• Sticker unobtrusively placed on head

• Videos and photos taken of 2-4 year old

• Showed them videos / photos after delay

• Older 3-4 years reached for sticker

• Younger children did not

  • Could label photo or video correctly

  • DID remove or touch sticker when presented with mirror

Full temporal sense of self develops after 3 years

What about other people?

Person permanence - internal representation of a social being (18 months)

Lewis and Brooks-Gun (1979) social dimensions

• Familiarity

  • Different behaviour to familiar vs strange adults (7-9 months)

  • Familiar vs strange peers (10-12 months)

• Age

  • Discriminate children and adults by 6-12 months

  • Use verbal age labels by 18-24 months

• Gender

  • Discriminate between women and men strangers (9-12 months)

  • Use verbal gender labels around 19 months

In the first year of life children learn to differentiate people based on familiarity, age, gender

Emotional Development: Production

• Positive and negative affect only after birth

• From a few months on, basic 'primary emotions' (joy, interest, anger, sadness)

• 7 months - fear responses, anger vs pain

• 2-3 years 'secondary emotions' (embarrassment, pride, shame)

  • E.g., fear + anger = envy, hate

Recognising Emotion

Discriminate emotions early on

Social referencing - gauge response from caregiver before reacting

• Wary reactions to strangers (and toys)

  • More positive when mother reacts positively

• Visual cliff

Emotional Intelligence

Learn to regulate emotion

• Switch from external to internal management

Emotion regulation and social competence

• Accuracy in recognising emotions = better acceptance by peers

• Links to developmental outcomes later in life

Late developing

• Into late childhood and adolescence

• Linked to maturation in the pre-frontal cortex

Harris (1989): Understanding Another's Mind

Precursors to this understanding

• Self awareness (18-20 months)

  • Verbally express emotional state (2 years)

• Capacity for pretence (2-3 years)

  • Pretend something in world is something else

• Distinguishing reality from pretence (3-4 years)

Combine these to start understanding other people's emotions, desires and beliefs

Theory of Mind

Other people have a mental representation of the world that is different from our own (beliefs, feelings etc)

• Theory - cannot see or touch the mind, have to infer

• Crucial to success in social world

• Develops with age

We test this in children using False Belief Tasks.

False Belief Tasks

• Wimmer & Perner (1983) - Where will Maxi look for the chocolate

  • Explained long story, have to answer where the person in the story believed they left the chocolate, not where they know it actually is

  • Only answered correctly over 4 years (5-8 yrs)

  • Too complicated? Story too long for memory?

• Sally-Anne Task

  • 4 year olds solve

  • 3 year olds do not

• Smarties task

  • Given smarties tube, but the child is shown while puppet is not looking that there are pencils inside. They need to decide what the puppet believes is inside

  • 4 and older solve

Developing Theory of Mind

Distinguishing mental states in language

• 2yrs+ use words about internal states (want)

• 3yrs+ use cognitive terms (know, remember)

Understanding the relationship between seeing and knowing

• By 3-4yrs understand that seeing something means knowing about

The appearance-reality distinction

• 3yrs have difficulty understanding 2 representations of an object at the same time

• Flavell et al (1986): What it looks like and what it is can be different e.g., rock / sponge and realism errors - can children distinguish that even though it looks like a rock, it's spongey

Predicting behaviour

• 2yrs understand that people have desires

• 3yrs understand that people have beliefs

• But do not yet understand that others can act on inaccurate beliefs

When is Theory of Mind Achieved?

Wellman et al (2001) review of 180 false belief studies

• Very few 2yr olds

• Minority 3yr olds

• 4yrs+ usually passed

Implicit knowledge before this

• 2-3 yr olds might look at the correct place, but identify incorect

• VoE experiments: in some conditions, 15 month olds could correctly predict behaviour on false belief task

Southgate & Vernetti (2014)

• Measured activation in motor cortex of adults (activated when the actor had false belief that ball is in the box)

• 6 month old infants showed the same brain activity

• Authors conclude: infants make action prediction based on the agent's beliefs

Curse of Knowledge

Knowledge of reality overrides knowledge of beliefs

Birch and Bloom (2007)

• Varied the amount knowledge state of the observer

  • Ignorance - 'moves the violin to another container'

  • Knowledge-plausible - 'moves the violin to the red container'

  • Knowledge-implausible - 'moves the violin to the purple container'

What impacts Development?

Language

• Children who perform better on false belief tasks tend to have better language abilities

• Children with caregivers who use more mental state terms earlier perform better

Interaction with peers/ family

• Those with older siblings do better

• Larger families, more interaction with adults and siblings also do better

What's next? ToM after 4 years

Understanding surprise

• 5 yrs (not 4) chose the correct 'surprise' face over neutral face

Deception

• E.g., lie about preferred sticker to puppet to avoid losing it

  • 5 years could lie from beginning

  • 4 yrs got better over trials

  • 3 yrs never learned to lie

Levels of Intentionality

False beliefs task (e.g., Sally Anne) = 1st order beliefs

2nd order beliefs = false belief about someone else's belief, 5-6yrs

Ambiguous Drawing Task

• 5-8yrs - all succeeded on false belief task

• Make sure child can see both interpretations

• What will Ann see?

• 5 yrs could not give a good answer

• Even some 8 yrs had trouble

Advanced Theory of Mind (AToM)

Osterhaus & Bosacki (2022) - Review of tests / results used from middle childhood on

• Found very diverse definitions

• But, most studies relying on same 4-5 tests

• Individual differences in AToM related to inhibition and language skills NOT empathy

Are these tests really getting at social cognition?

• What about diverse social backgrounds and experiences?

Theories of How ToM Develops

Conceptual change between 3-5 years

• Develop concept of (meta) representations

• Mental states aren't direct reflections of reality, but can be inaccurate

• Evidence: differences between 3&4 year olds on traditional false-belief tasks

Understanding develops gradually

• Do not suddenly acquire concept

• 'Realist' tendency overrides understanding of beliefs

• Other cognitive abilities mask understanding

• Evidence: tasks reduce complexity / cognitive demands show success at younger ages; ongoing development and perhaps some decline on certain measures with older age

Prosocial Behaviour and Moral Reasoning

Thursday 21 November 2024

10:21

Prosocial Behaviour

'Voluntary behaviour intended to benefit another'

• Sharing, helping, comforting

Altruistic vs Prosocial

• Motivated purely by desire to help another, at cost to oneself (e.g., anonymous donation)

• Pattern of behaviour, regardless of motivation (potential benefit / associated costs to the donor)

Why be Prosocial?

Evolutionary roots - increase survival of kin

• More likely to assist genetically related individuals (humans and non humans)

• Benefit the survival of the group

E.g., Eisenberg (1983)

• 7-17 year olds more likely to help family, friends and similar background

Enhance reputation / acceptance within group, learn to follow norms of behaviour

Innate or Learned?

Are humans naturally prosocial?

• Spontaneous prosocial behaviour in children from relatively early age

• Some evidence from twin studies of genetic contribution to prosocial tendencies

Conditioned or socially learned

• Early attachment to parents

• Parental / adult responses to behaviour important

Development of Prosocial Behaviour

When does it emerge?

• Around first birthday, helping behaviour emerges

• Rapidly increases in toddler / preschooler period, and then slowly thereafter into early adulthood

• At least into late adolescence

• Shift to act according to moral principles, rather than for selfish motivations or to gain approval

Experimental Studies

Reinforce prosocial behaviour

• Prompting and reinforcement both encouraged prosocial donations (e.g., donation game)

• Explicit scaffolding (encouragement and praise) increases prosocial behaviour in infants (e.g., Dahl et al. 2017)

Modelling prosocial behaviour

• Observing helpful behaviour increases prosocial behaviour in infants

• Children who see model donate are more likely to themselves (more impact than 'preaching')

• More likely to copy skilled, warm and familiar models

  • Modelling behaviour significantly increases prosocial behaviour in infants - more impactful than 'preaching' behaviour

Potential problems

• Unfamiliar experimenters, some deception

• Really measuring prosocial behaviour?

  • No effect of modelling after 3 week follow up

    • Child just trying to puzzle out 'right' solution or conform to adult demands?

  • Zarbatany et al. (1985): older children only affected by experimenter influence, not peer influence

    • Measuring age differences in conformity

Observational Studies

Observe spontaneous, naturally occurring behaviour (directly or through reports)

Zahn-Waxler et al (2001): 14-36 months

• Mothers report responses to events in which negative emotions expressed by the mother

• Increase in empathic responses by children with age

Harmond & Bromwell (2018)

• Parents asked to report on helping behaviour and motivations in 1-4 year olds

• Helping increased with age

Experimental Study of Spontaneous Helping

Warneken & Tomasello (2006)

• 24x 18 month olds

• Experimental condition: looked at dropped object and child, verbalised problem of dropped object

• Control: neutral face toward object

Children more likely to help in experimental condition for most tasks

• Immediately in most cases - eye contact and verbal announcement unnecessary

• Restricted by ability to interpret goal / need

Helped more than chimpanzees (e.g., chimp)

• Unfamiliar adult

• Increase in prosociality may be down to more sophisticated cognitive skills

• Natural tendency to help others

Factors Influencing Prosocial Development

Parenting Styles and Responses

• Secure attachment = higher empathy

• Parents who are empathic, respond sensitively, encourage empathy

Perspective taking ability

Ability to regulate emotions

Cross-cultural differences

• Values placed on cooperation vs competition, individualism vs support

Moral Reasoning

How we judge whether an action is right or wrong

• Piaget

• Kohlberg

Piaget's Theory

Rules of the game method: observed how children understood 'rules of the game', corresponds to 'rules of society'

3 stages of understanding

• Premoral (up to 4 years) - rules not understood

• Moral realism / heteronomous (4-10) - rules come from higher authority, cannot be changes

• Moral subjectivism / autonomous (10+) - rules mutually agreed by players, can change

Linaza (1984) - cross cultural test

• English and Spanish children

• Confirmed Piaget's findings

Dilemma method: which child is the naughtiest?

• Up to 9/10 years, children based on amount of damage, not motive or intention

Problems with this design?

• Unequal damage distracts children

• 'Bad intentions' are vague

• Memory demands too high for young children

Criticisms of Piaget's theory

• Underestimation of ability?

  • E.g., if damage is equal, children as young as 5 years will judge based on intent

  • 2-5 year olds can differentiate between violations of social convention and moral conventions

Kohlberg's Theory

Expanded upon Piaget's concepts

• Across the life span, not just childhood

• Much more intense study of over 30 years

Participants presented with stories of 'dilemmas'

• Crucial aspect was why something was or wasn't wrong

Example:

• In Europe, a woman was near death from cancer. One drug might save her, a form of radium that a druggist in the same town had recently discovered. The druggist was charging $2,000, ten times what the drug cost him to make. The sick woman’s husband, Heinz, went to everyone he knew to borrow the money, but he could only get together about half of what it cost. He told the druggist that his wife was dying and asked him to sell it cheaper or let him pay later. But the druggist said, “No.” The husband got desperate and broke into the man’s store to steal the drug for his wife. Should the husband have done that? Why?

Kohlberg's levels of moral reasoning - developed 3 levels of reasoning, each with 2 stages

• Preconventional

• Conventional

• Postconventional

Preconventional Morality

Reason is in relation to self, little understanding of shared rules

• Seek pleasure, avoid punishment

• Children under 9, some adolescents, adult 'criminal offenders'

Stage 1:

• Concerned with authority, obey rules to avoid punishment

Stage 2:

• Weigh the risks and benefits

• Recognise others might have different interests

• Action determined by one's needs

Conventional Morality

Importance of rules, expectations, conventions of society

• Most adolescents and adults

Stage 3 - focus on interpersonal relationships:

• Being good = having good motives

• Living up to what is 'expected' of you

  • Approval / disapproval of others important

Stage 4 - focus on society as a whole:

• Performing one's duty to maintain social order

Postconventional Morality

Understanding of moral principles underlying laws

Stage 5:

• Importance of functioning society AND individual rights

• Usually not until 20+ years, and not everyone

Stage 6:

• Following universal ethical principles

• When law violates principle, act in accordance to principle

Heinz's Moral Dilemma

He shouldn't steal the drug because:

• Stage 1: he might get caught

• Stage 2: It won't do him any good because his wife will be dead when he gets out of jail

• Stage 3: others will think he is a thief

• Stage 4: his wife's condition doesn't justify stealing

• Stage 5: although the druggist is being unfair, we must respect the rights of others

• Stage 6: he should steal the drug, but should give himself up. He'll have to pay the price, but he will have saved a life

Criticisms of Kohlberg's Theory

Dilemmas criticised for being too artificial, and not reliable

• Clinical interview method too subjective

Cultural bias

• Snarey (1985) review of studies in 27 cultures

  • Similar progression through stages 1-4, but stage 5 only found in urban societies

  • Biased toward cultures favouring individualism

Gender bias

• All original participants male

• Stages reflect specifically 'male morality'

Gilligan (1982)

• Criticised both Piaget and Kohlberg of negative views of 'female morality'

• Argued females more concerned about impact behaviour has on others

• 'People before principles' (female) vs 'principles before people' (male)

  • “Prominent among those who thus appear to be deficient in moral development when measured by Kohlberg’s scale are women, whose judgments seem to exemplify the third stage of his six-stage sequence. At this stage morality is conceived in interpersonal terms and goodness is equated with helping and pleasing others. This conception of goodness is considered by Kohlberg and Kramer (1969) to be functional in the lives of mature women insofar as their lives take place in the home . . . . Yet herein lies a paradox, for the very traits that traditionally have defined the “goodness” of women, their care for and sensitivity to the needs of others, are those that mark them as deficient in moral development.”

Summary

Prosocial behaviour

• Develops rapidly throughout toddler / preschool years

• Shaped by reinforcement and modelling

• Linked to other cognitive abilities

• Are we inherently prosocial and this then encouraged or do we learn to be prosocial?

Moral reasoning

• Continues to develop into adulthood

• Views of morality shaped by culture

• More diverse, cross-cultural studies needed

Neurodivergence in Development and Autism

Thursday 5 December 2024

09:50

What are developmental conditions / differences?

Condition manifesting before adulthood that alters typical development

• Motor, cognitive, socio-emotional

• One (specific) or more (pervasive) of these areas affected

• Can manifest in delay or deficit or difference

Caveat!

• Language matters (and is always changing)

• Diagnostic manuals and some practitioners will refer to 'neurodevelopmental disorders' (reserved to those with a functional impairment in day to day life)

• We are exploring the history of autism to better understand where we are today and how we can move forward

  • Person-first (person with autism) vs identity-first (autistic person)

Causes of Developmental Conditions

Chromosomal abnormalities

• Genetic mutation (e.g., Down Syndrome - extra copy of Chromosome 21)

Prenatal factors

• Damage while in womb (oxygen deprivation, maternal infection, structural differences in brain) e.g., Cerebral Palsy

Unknown combination

• Genetic, environmental, psychological, neurological

Autism

Early descriptions

• Low IQ

• 'Autistic aloneness' - inability to relate to others

• 'Desire for sameness' - upset by changes

Wing & Gould (1979) - Triad of Impairments

A - Impairments in social interaction (lack of eye-to-eye contact, failure to develop peer relations)

B - Impairments in communication (language delay, lack of varied make-believe play)

C - Restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviour (narrow interests, ritualistic or compulsive behaviours)

Summary of DSM-V Criteria

1. Persistent deficits in social communication and social interaction across contexts, not accounted for by general developmental delays, and manifest by all 3 of the following:

   1. Deficits in social-emotional reciprocity

   2. Deficits in nonverbal communicative behaviours used for social interaction

   3. Deficits in developing and maintaining relationships

1. Restricted, repetitive patterns of behaviour, interests, or activities as manifested by at least two of the following:

   1. Stereotyped or repetitive speech, motor movements, or use of objects

   2. Excessive adherence to routines, ritualized patterns of verbal or nonverbal behaviour, or excessive resistance to change

   3. Highly restricted, fixated interests that are abnormal in intensity or focus

   4. Hyper-or hypo-reactivity to sensory input or unusual interest in sensory aspects of environment

1. Symptoms must be present in early childhood (but may not become fully manifest until social demands exceed limited capacities

1. Symptoms together limit and impair everyday functioning

Description and Diagnosis

Different characteristics and combinations of criteria, varying severity

May show 'islets of ability' equivalent to, or better than neurotypical people (e.g., rote memory, spatial tasks)

3x more men / boys diagnosed than women / girls

• Might be down to different presentation / outdated or biased view of autism

• Similar difficulties in diagnosis with non-binary individuals and ethnic minorities

Causes of Autism?

Hereditary component

• Some evidence from twin and family studies

Structural differences in the brain

• Connection or structural differences in the brain?

• Differences between girls and boys? Need more data

BUT: to date, no clear genetic / neurological explanation

Problems with Diagnosis

Diagnosed and defined using behavioural criteria

• Some signs appear early (12-18 months)

• Typically around 3+ years, but can go undiagnosed

Increase recently in numbers, largely due to better diagnostic material and understanding of impairments

Developmental outcomes highly variable

• Why so much variability in terms of what develops, when, and in whom?

'Traditional' Theories of Autism

Many theories attempt to explain differences, including:

• Executive Function

• Weak Central Coherence

• Theory of Mind Deficit

Caveat: Outdated literature has contributed to these

Executive Functioning (EF) - an umbrella term

• E.g., planning, organising, inhibition, impulse control, sustaining attention

• Can repetitive, restricted behaviours can be explained by impairment in executive control?

  • Early difficulties in EF might play role in developmental outcomes

  • Correlation between EF and ToM

Weak Central Coherence

• Central coherence - TD people have tendency to process incoming information globally

• WCC - bias for featural or local information, details

  • Proposed to explain certain aspects of autism

  • E.g., islets of ability, excellent rote memory, preoccupation with parts of objects

  • Superiority in detail, rather than deficit in global?

Theory of Mind Deficit

How might a ToM deficit lead to social impairments

• Limits effective social understanding

• Makes it difficult to interpret behaviour of others

• Makes it difficult to  communicate

• Might explain sameness and routine indirectly

Same tests for neurotypical children can be applied

Baron-Cohen et al (1985)

• Sally-Anne false belief task

• Autism with mental age >4

• TD children aged 4

• Down's syndrome with mental age >4

Results:

• 80% of TD and DS solved

• Only 20% of autistic group

  • Perner et al (1989) found similar results with Smarties task

• Autistic children could order and explain mechanical and behavioural stories

• Difficulty ordering 'mentalistic' stories

  • Randomly ordered, and only reported what they could see, no mental states

Limitations of the ToM Hypothesis

• Not all children fail these tasks

  • Autistic children sometimes perform at TD levels

  • Challenge universality of ToM deficits, and thus the hypothesis?

• Not necessarily

  • Autistic children don't solve until much older than TD children

  • Perhaps relying on different strategies on simpler tasks

  • What about more challenging ToM tasks?

• Second order beliefs

  • 'Where does Anne think Sally will look for the marble?'

  • Some autistic individuals can solve these tasks

Strange Stories Task

More natural, complex challenge than false beliefs task - participants read short story and are asked why a character says something they don't mean literally (white lie, pretend, joking, idioms)

'One day Aunt Jane came to visit Peter. Now Peter loves his aunt very much, but today she is wearing a new hat; a new hat, which Peter thinks is very ugly indeed. Peter thinks his aunt looks silly in it, and much nicer in her old hat. But when Aunt Jane asks Peter “What do you think of my new hat?” Peter says, “Oh, it’s very nice."'

Even those who passed second order ToM tasks were impaired - more naturalistic, more nuance to story than just one false belief (pretence, sarcasm, deception)

• However, is this too vocabulary loaded?

Reading the mind through the eyes

Infer mental states from eyes alone

• Designed to address ToM abilities beyond those of a 6 year old

• Choose between correct emotion and 'foil'

Autistic group significantly impaired compared to TD group and Tourette Syndrome group

Is it really measuring ToM?

• Test has been criticised, particularly by autistic people

'Harmless' Theorising - Real World Consequences

Offensive, ignorant, flawed, easily debunked with modern context, over 30 years old, still being taught every day outside of academia as though it is fact and embedded in professional thinking

Gernsbacher & Yergeau (2019)

'Empirical Failures of the Claim that Autistic People Lack a Theory of Mind'

• Failures of specificity

• Failures of universality

• Failures of replicability

• Failures of validity

Failures of Specificity and Universality

Many non-autistic individuals fail these tasks

• Children with other developmental conditions as well

• Neurotypical children more likely to fail if they have fewer siblings, fewer adult relatives living nearby

Not all autistic participants fail these tasks

Why do some pass and others don't?

• ToM tasks rely heavily on spoken language

• Longitudinal studies suggest vocabulary predicts performance on false belief tasks more than age

• Meta-analyses comparing autistic vs non-autistic individuals found that vocabulary predicts false belief performance more than whether or not an individual is autistic

Really only tapping into communication impairments?

Failures of Replicability and Validity

Failure to replicate earlier findings

• E.g., Baron-Cohen et al (1986) - no other study has found the same differences

• Strange stories and Sally-Anne tasks also mixed results

• Small sample sizes in original studies

Failures of convergent validity

• Are different ToM tests measuring the same construct?

• Performance on many ToM tasks isn't correlated (e.g., performance on strange stories and reading the mind in the eyes tasks)

Failures of predictive validity

• Does performance on ToM tasks predict socioemotional function?

• Evidence that does not significantly predict empathy / emotional understanding, social skills, peer relations / pro-social behaviour and more

What else might Explain the Differences?

Double-empathy problem (e.g., Milton 2012; Mitchell et al, 2021)

• Autistic and non-autistic people have different social communication styles

• Breakdown in mutual understanding

Sheppard et al (2016)

• Autistic and non-autistic people filmed during 4 conditions (joke, waiting, telling story, compliments)

• Non-autistic participants better able to correctly identify condition for other non-autistics (in all except 'joke' condition)

  • Not because autistic participants reacting 'less expressively'

  • In a separate study, rated just as 'expressive' as non-autistic people in all conditions except 'compliments'

Moving Forward

Acknowledging biases and impacts on autistic people

• Traditional ToM deficit account has been accused of dehumanising autistic individuals

• Perspectives of autistic people rarely taken into consideration

Acknowledging different expressions of social behaviour

• Neurotypical people fail to read minds of autistic people (Sheppard et al, 2016)

• Different ways of viewing the world leading to breakdown in understanding

Acknowledging the impact these perceptions can have on development

• Clinical practice

• Parent-child interactions

• Self-esteem and well-being

Adolescence and Adulthood

Sunday 12 January 2025

11:11

Adolescence and Puberty

Physical changes

• Sexual maturity

• Growth spurt (5-6cm per year in childhood, 9-10cm in adolescence)

Brain development

• 'Remodelling of the brain'

  • Areas affecting emotional regulation, response inhibition, planning

• Increase white matter, decrease grey matter

• Greater plasticity in the brain (more sensitive to input)

Psychological changes

• Risk-taking, moodiness, aggression?

• Transition from childhood to adulthood

Stages of Adolescence

1. Early (11-14yrs)

2. Middle (15-17yrs)

3. Late (18+ yrs)

When does it end? 18? 21? 25?

Adolescence is a period of turmoil.

Erikson - Identity Crisis

Theory of psychosocial development

• Different 'conflict' at each stage which must be resolved successfully

Identity crisis in adolescence

• What is an identity?

  • A subjective sense as well as an observable quality of personal sameness and continuity, paired with some belief in the sameness and continuity of some shared world image

• 'Psychosocial moratorium' - a period of exploration and experimentation in adolescence that allows individuals to explore their identity without the immediate pressures of adult responsibilities1. This period is crucial for forming a stable and well-defined sense of self.

Marcia (1966)

Interview technique to assess stage of identity crisis

• Occupational role, beliefs and values, sexuality

Identified 4 identity 'statuses'

• Diffusion - haven't started thinking about it seriously (no identity crisis or commitment)

• Foreclosure - formed commitment without having explored possibilities

• Moratorium - still considering alternatives

• Achievement of identity - been through crisis and reached a solution

Identity Achievement

May develop into adulthood

Criticisms

• Moratorium status for different areas at different times

• Gradual changes into adulthood

Storm and Stress

Adolescence traditionally viewed as period of turbulence

• Socrates - youth inclined to 'contradict their parents' and 'tyrannize their teachers'

• Conflict with parents, risky behaviour, mood disruptions

More recent empirical evidence suggests a modified view is necessary

• Not experienced by all adolescents

• Over-exaggerated

Conflict with Parents

Conflicts increase in early adolescence, intensity peaks in middle adolescence

• Dip in closeness from 10-16 years, recovers at 25

Conflicts may not be as high as expected

• Only 1/6 of parents and 1/3 of adolescents reported conflicts

Even in conflict situations, often concern mundane matters (chores, appearance, finance)

• Core values and attachment typically maintained

• Helps develop autonomy in safe environment

Mood Disruption

Adolescents report more mood disruptions than children or adults

Some longitudinal studies report negative affect (Buchanan et al. 1992)

Adolescent turmoil over-exaggerated? (Rutter et al. 1976)

• Modest peak of reported mood disruptions in adolescence (compared to 10 year olds)

• Only roughly 1/5 reported mood disruption

ADOLESCENCE SUMMARY:

• Important cognitive changes during adolescence

• Important social changes; shift from childhood to adulthood

  • Conflict with autonomy and dependence

• Is a period of turmoil and change

  • But this has been exaggerated somewhat

  • Cultural trends favouring individualism may lead to more conflict

Adulthood - Overview (according to Erikson)

Young adulthood (20-40yrs)

• Acquisition and utilisation of knowledge at peak

• Achieve maturity

• Erikson's conflict - intimacy vs isolation

Middle adulthood (40-64yrs)

• Some decline, but also intellectual stability

• Peak of career achievement

• Erikson's conflict - generativity vs stagnation

Late adulthood (64yrs+)

• Memory and other abilities decline, some might remain stable

• Erikson's conflict: integrity vs despair

Cognitive Gains: Adolescence to Young Adulthood

Piaget's formal operations (11+ years)

• Logic, inferential reasoning, planning, ability to think about abstract concepts, hypothetical situations

• Criticisms: Limited to straightforward situations, not complexities and vagaries of real-life situations

Post-formal thinking, 3 themes (Kramer, 1983)

• Realisation of 'relativistic' nature of knowledge

• Acceptance of contradiction

• Integration of contradiction into a whole concept

Information processing (e.g., perceptual speed & numerical ability)

Social cognition

• Functional changes in brain areas related to social cognition

• Increased performance on tasks

E.g., Vetter et al. (2012)

• Strange stories task & Eyes task

• Young / mid adolescents (12-15yrs) performed with lower accuracy than late adolescents / young adults (18-22yrs)

• Individual differences in basic cognitive abilities and gender did not influence age differences

Young to Middle Adulthood

General stability in cognitive abilities

• Some slight decreases

Some evidence of increase in certain areas

• Willis & Chaie (1999)

  • Seattle Longitudinal Study - inductive reasoning, vocabulary, verbal memory and spatial orientation peak from 40-60yrs

• Soederbreg et al (2000)

  • MA (40-59) showed no declines compared to YA (25-39)

  • Outperformed YA on vocabulary tests

Middle to Late Adulthood

General decline in cognitive ability

• Finkel et al (1998)

  • Significantly better performance in middle (55) than late adulthood (83) on 14 cognitive abilities

  • Largest differe

    

    nce in perceptual speed

• Schaie et al (1998)

  • Decline in ages 60-67 in all tested areas expect verbal recall

Terminal decline

• Salthouse (2012)

  • Cognitive functioning often lower several years prior to death

HOWEVER NOT ALL DOOM AND GLOOM!

• Some abilities might remain in tact

• Little evidence of relation between age (20-75yrs) and functioning in society

• Role of experience

  • E.g., pilots - experience more important determinant of crash risk than aging

What Affects Cognitive Decline?

• Different abilities affected more

• Relationship between physical health and cognitive ability

• Type of job

• Genetic influence